Question

shelley offers to sell jane goods both parties know are stolen. jane accepts the off for the goods. later, jane refuses to accept or pay for the goods. if shelley sues for what is the probable result? explain your answer in detail using the applicable prir law. be sure to respond for yourself and then two other posts.

Explanation:

In contract law, a valid contract requires legality of purpose. Here, the goods are known to be stolen. A contract for the sale of stolen goods is illegal as it violates public policy (the law discourages dealing with stolen property). Such an illegal contract is void ab initio (void from the beginning). Since the contract is void, Shelley has no legal right to enforce it. Jane's refusal to accept or pay is justified because there was no enforceable contract in the first place.

Answer:

Shelley will lose the lawsuit. The contract is void due to its illegal nature (sale of stolen goods), so there is no obligation on Jane's part that Shelley can enforce.