Tom and Zeke enter into a contract for Tom to paint Zeke’s house for $1,000. The contract doesn’t specify a time for performance by Tom. Six years later, Tom shows up with a bucket of paint, paints the house, and demands payment. Which of the following is true? A. Tom breached the contract because he didn’t perform within a reasonable time. B. The contract was unenforceable because it didn’t specify a time for performance. C. The contract violates the statute of frauds. D. Tom couldn’t have breached the contract because the contract didn’t specify a time for performance, and he did do the painting work.

Tom and Zeke enter into a contract for Tom to paint Zeke's house for $1,000. The contract doesn't specify a time for performance by Tom. Six years later, Tom shows up with a bucket of paint, paints the house, and demands payment. Which of the following is true?

1. Tom breached the contract because he didn't perform within a reasonable time.
2. The contract was unenforceable because it didn't specify a time for performance.
3. The contract violates the statute of frauds.
4. Tom couldn't have breached the contract because the contract didn't specify a time for performance, and he did do the painting work.

Answer

• Tom breached the contract because he didn't perform within a reasonable time.

Explanation:

Time and place of the contract performance are essential elements of any contract. If the time and place of performance are agreed in the contract, the promisor is expected to perform the promise accordingly. However, if place is not specified, then the promisor is expected to perform the contract at a reasonable time. Reasonable time depends on different situations surrounding a contract and its definition varies from one contract to another. In the above contract, painting a house after a period of 5 years is not reasonable and hence Tom would be considered to have breached the contract.