Discuss the reasoning of the court in the case of Ardito et al. v. City of Providence, 213 F.Supp. 2d 358 (D RI). Can you identify an offer and an acceptance in this case? Can you make out a bilateral or unilateral contract? How could the October 15 letter be revised to avoid being considered a unilateral contract?
The reasoning of the court is that this was a unilateral contract. The point is that the city had promised that if the applicants submitted to the exams they'd have a spot in the academy training. This was an opportunity to the job. The argument of the court was that the contract was valid when the contract was performed. Ardito accepted the city's offer by submitting himself to medical tests.
The letters to the candidates stated that if the ...
A promise in exchange for an act by another party is discussed step-by-step in this solution. The response also has the sources used.