Voidable Contracts

[rayperez]

I was given the following question for my essentials of business law class and I was looking for some feeback. Not sure I have a valid argument.

Q-1. Anita and Barry were negotiating, and Anita’s attorney prepared a long and carefully drawn contract that was given to Barry for examination. Five days later and prior to its execution, Barry’s eyes became so infected that it was impossible for him to read. Ten days thereafter and during the continuance of the illness, Anita called Barry and urged him to sign the contract, telling him that time was running out. Barry signed the contract despite the fact he was unable to read it. In a subsequent action by Anita, Barry claimed that the contract was not binding on him because it was impossible for him to read and he did not know what it contained prior to his signing it. Should Barry be held to the contract?

Answer: The contract is voidable by the offeree because the law requires that the agreement be voluntary and knowing. Barry was unknowing of the statues and limitations of the contract because of his aliment, one side involuntary accepted the terms of the other. In addition Anita placed Barry under mental duress by calling him and stating “time was running out”.

[LawResearcherMissy]

We don't do homework here as a general rule. But I'm wondering something...

Barry was unknowing of the statues and limitations of the contract because of his aliment

What stopped Barry from taking this contract to his attorney and asking for a rundown and recommendations?

I can see (and have seen) a judge asking this. You may want to address that.