The estate points to the essential elements of a contract—offer, acceptance, consideration, and a meeting of the minds—contained in these writings.
But the estate’s lawyer said the Mead de-naming dispute isn’t the typical case addressed by that law. Unlike other benefactors, Mead didn’t merely pledge money to the school and then walk away, a point Ithis past May. As the lawyer put it on Friday, “he was giving a chapel with a name and they accepted the chapel with the name.” The Mead name, as mentioned above, was an essential term of the contract.
to make the chapel “an instrument of great good to those of this generation and those of the distant future.” Did they foresee that those of the distant future would be so smug in their self-righteousness as to turn against their benefactors?