On May 1, 2015, Eckerly Realty Inc. mailed a written offer to Masse for the sale of an office building. The offer included an express term that it would expire on June 30, 2015 if the acceptance was not delivered into the hands of the offeror by the expiration date. On June 30, 2015 at 8:00 a.m., Masse sent a written acceptance to Eckerly via Masse’s personal messenger. However, the messenger was not able to deliver the acceptance until July 1, 2015. On July 2, 2015, Eckerly contacted Masse, informing him that the acceptance had been delivered one day late. As a result, Eckerly refused to honor the acceptance. Which of the following is the most correct statement?

a. There is no contract between Eckerly and Masse. However, if Masse would have mailed the acceptance on June 30, 2015, a contract would have been created.

b. There is a contract between Eckerly and Masse. The moment that Masse gave the acceptance to the messenger, a contract was formed because acceptances are valid immediately upon dispatch.

c. There is a contract between Eckerly and Masse. The fact that the acceptance arrived only one day late is of no significance.

d. There is no contract between Eckerly and Masse.

A) There is no contract between Eckerly and Masse. However, if Masse would have mailed the acceptance on June 30, 2015, a contract would have been created.

Explanation:

If Masse would have mailed his acceptance of the offer instead of sending it with his private messenger, then it would be considered a valid acceptance and a contract would have been formed.

In contract law, the postal rule states that an acceptance to an offer can be sent through mail and the date of the acceptance is the date that it was mailed, not when it was delivered. This only applies to the acceptance of an offer, not to making the offer itself in the first place.