The BUSKLAW Newsletter

In last month's post, we highlighted the story of the guy who purchased a vase from an uninformed seller at a Connecticut yard sale for $35. The vase turned out to be from the 15th century Chinese Ming dynasty, and it was auctioned off on  March 17 for over $700K . We discussed the contract doctrine of unilateral mistake that gives the seller no recourse and concluded that the application of the Golden Rule ("do unto others as you would have them do unto you") would lead to a different result.  As brought to my attention by the always informative ContractsProf Blog , it turns out that there's a somewhat similar "windfall" case (i.e., an unexpected financial benefit from getting something that is ostensibly worth little - or nothing)  involving the acquirer of someone else's assumed trash who, after applying some good old-fashioned mental elbow-grease, turned it into a treasure. And then applied the Golden Rule. But where did the Golden Rule come from? I...

  (not the real bowl, but can you tell the difference?) Buys a porcelain floral bowl for 35 bucks. As CNN reported  here , the man then decides to have the bowl appraised, suspecting that it might be worth something. Turns out, the bowl was commissioned by China's imperial court during the 15th Century and is worth up to $500,000 when Sotheby's auctions it off this month.  You are the seller's attorney, what do you do (besides getting your fee upfront, you'll see why). You check the well-established case law on what constitutes a unilateral mistake of fact. Based on the known facts of this case, you have bad news for your client.   Here, the seller mistakenly underpriced the bowl, a unilateral mistake. Generally, courts are reluctant to void a contract when only one party is mistaken. But you forge ahead anyway and sue the buyer (before the auction) to rescind - or set aside - the contract. You tell the court that your client will gladly return the $35 purchase...