You are in the process of buying a large print shop, Perpetual Printers. You negotiate a deal to
buy the print shop, including the land on which it sits, for $1 million. For the agreed price of
$1 million, you will obtain 100% ownership of Perpetual Printers. You make this deal with a
very good friend of yours. Your friend really sells you on the deal because as he put it:
"People will forever need printers! That is why I named my business 'Perpetual Printers!
Business will always be good!"
Because you two are such good friends, you decide not to put this deal in writing. This is a
simple exchange: $1 million in exchange for 100% ownership. However, you will pay your
friend the $1 million in installments. You agree to pay your friend $100,000 per month for
ten months, starting in March. You two shake on it and seal the deal on January 1, 2023, and
by the terms of the deal, you will be all paid up and will take full ownership by December 31,
2023.
It is now July 1, 2023. Up to this point, everything has worked out as planned. However, new
technology hit the market. This technology renders printing obsolete. Steadily, your clientele
diminishes. In panic mode, you seek ways to get out of the contract. You file a lawsuit asking
the court to rescind and/or to void the contract on the following grounds: (1) the contract
should be voided because it violates the statute of frauds; (2) the contract should be
rescinded because of unilateral mistake, or in the alternative, because of bilateral mistake; and
(3) the contract should rescinded because of fraud.
Are any one, or all, of these claims likely to succeed? Please explain your answer.