Mutual Assents: In the case of Jones v. Horner it appeared that Jones was a tenant of Mrs. Homer. The lease gave Jones an option to purchase the property for a stated price and provided that Jones might exercise his option "by payment or tender of the agreed purchase price." Jones, within the life of the option, without tendering the purchase price, gave notice that he would exercise the option. He said he would pay the purchase price upon receipt of a deed to the property. Mrs. Homer refused to treat this notice as a valid exercise of the option.
Judge Swepston sustained the chancellor who had held in the trial court that Mrs. Homer was not bound. He points out that an option is an irrevocable offer and, like any other offer, must be accepted in accordance with its terms in order to make a contract. The terms of this option called for payment--not merely a promise to pay. The Judge points out that the rule of substantial compliance is not applicable to the exercise of an option.
Merton L. Ferson,
Contracts -- 1954 Tennessee Survey,
7 Vanderbilt Law Review
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol7/iss5/4