## Facts

- Klick-Lewis, Inc., an automobile dealership, placed a new Chevrolet Beretta at a golf course with signs stating that a “HOLE-IN-ONE” would win a specified Beretta, identifying the dealership as sponsor.
- During a separate golf tournament two days after a charity event, Amos Cobaugh reached the relevant tee, saw the car and signs, and made a hole-in-one.
- Cobaugh attempted to claim the car based on the posted promotion.
- Klick-Lewis refused, asserting the car and signs were intended only for a prior tournament and were left in place by mistake.
- Cobaugh sued to compel delivery of the vehicle.
- The parties stipulated to the material facts and filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Cobaugh and ordered Klick-Lewis to deliver the car.

## Issues

1. Whether the display and signage constituted an offer for a unilateral contract that Cobaugh accepted by making a hole-in-one.
2. Whether the promise was supported by consideration or was merely a nonbinding conditional gift.
3. Whether mistake regarding the promotion’s intended event rendered the agreement unenforceable.
4. Whether the arrangement was void as illegal gambling or against public policy.

## Decision

- The Superior Court affirmed summary judgment for Cobaugh.
- The signage and display constituted an objective offer to the public; Cobaugh accepted by performing the specified act (a hole-in-one) before any withdrawal.
- Consideration existed because Klick-Lewis sought promotional value and Cobaugh performed an act he had no legal duty to perform.
- No mutual mistake existed; any error was unilateral to Klick-Lewis and did not void the contract.
- The promotion was not illegal gambling because skill was a substantial factor in achieving a hole-in-one.

## Legal Principles

- A public promotional announcement that specifies clear conditions for winning a prize can constitute an offer for a unilateral contract.
- In a unilateral contract, acceptance occurs by complete performance of the specified act, if done before the offer is withdrawn.
- Contract formation is determined by outward manifestations and the reasonable meaning of the offer’s language, not undisclosed intent.
- Consideration may be found in the promisor’s anticipated promotional benefit and the promisee’s voluntary performance of a requested act.
- Unilateral mistake, especially when caused by the promisor’s negligence and not shared by the promisee, generally does not void an otherwise clear offer.
- A prize arrangement is not void as gambling where the outcome materially depends on skill rather than chance.

## Conclusion

The court enforced the hole-in-one promotion as a unilateral contract formed by an objective public offer and Cobaugh’s performance, supported by consideration, and not defeated by the dealer’s unilateral mistake or by a gambling/public-policy defense.


Cobaugh v. Klick-Lewis, Inc., 561 A.2d 1248 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1989)