A woman offers to sell her office printer to a friend for $450, telling her to accept by mail to her business address but that the friend may use any reasonable means of acceptance. The friend accepts by mailing to the woman’s home address. The printer is later sold to another party after the one-week deadline. Will the friend likely succeed in a breach-of-contract action?

• A. No, because the offeror determines the manner and means of acceptance.
• B. No, because the acceptance was not mailed to the specified address.
• C. Yes, because the contract requires acceptance by mail.
• D. Yes, because the offeror did not specify a unique acceptance method.

Answer: (C)

The key idea is that when an offer sets a specific mode of acceptance but also says any reasonable means may be used, the offeree can choose a reasonable alternative and the contract forms when acceptance is dispatched. The mailbox rule applies: acceptance is effective at the moment of mailing if the chosen method is authorized or reasonably acceptable.

Here, the offer requires acceptance by mail to the business address, but it also says any reasonable means of acceptance may be used. Mailing the acceptance to the woman’s home address is still a form of mail and would be considered a reasonable method under the grant. Therefore, the contract is formed when the acceptance is mailed (within the one-week deadline). Once formed, selling the printer to someone else would breach the contract, so the friend would likely succeed in a breach-of-contract action.

The other options are less accurate because they ignore the effect of allowing reasonable means of acceptance and the timing rules that apply when a reasonable alternative is used, or they misstate the impact of the specified method versus permissible alternatives.