The correct statements are that the contract is valid, and the law will imply that the respective performances are mutually dependent. Despite the lack of specifications in timing, the contract remains enforceable. Each party's obligations depend on the other's performance in the transaction.
;
In the scenario presented, we're dealing with a contract for the sale of land between Lery and Briar. The contract mentions the price of $18,000 but omits the specifics regarding the timing of the delivery of the deed and the payment of the price.
Here are the correct statements:
The contract is valid.
A contract for the sale of land can be valid even if it does not specify the exact timing for the delivery of the deed and payment, as long as the basic elements of a contract are present: offer, acceptance, and consideration. The law often fills in the gaps where details like timing are not specified, guided by standards such as 'reasonable time' based on common business practices.
The law will imply that the respective performances are mutually dependent.
When a contract does not specify the timing for delivery and payment, it's generally implied by law that these performances are concurrent conditions. This means that the transfer of the deed and the payment of the price are dependent on each other. Neither party can demand performance by the other until they are ready to perform their own obligations.