Marcy wanted to buy Lucy's land and use it to breed small pigs to be kept as pets. Marcy told Lucy that having water on the property was very important. Lucy assured her that a spring ran through one corner of the property. Therefore, Marcy agreed to buy the farm. Although she did not ask Lucy anything about it, Marcy, who loved pigs, assumed that the neighbors would be pleased with the pigs being in the area. In a separate contract, Lucy also agreed to sell Marcy a used truck for $5,000. After the contract for the land sale was entered into, it was discovered that actually the spring did not run through the corner of Lucy's property. The area in which the spring ran actually belonged to a neighbor. Additionally, when Lucy brought Marcy the used truck, Marcy said, "That's not the truck!" It was discovered that Lucy, who had two trucks, thought that Marcy had bought the older truck when Marcy thought she had purchased the newer truck. Marcy was also surprised when she received a petition signed by all surrounding landowners objecting to the presence of the pigs and threatening to sue Marcy for nuisance. Which of the following would be the result if Marcy attempts to rescind the contract and recover damages only on the basis of the neighbors' objection to a pig farm? 1) Marcy may rescind the contract and recover damages because Lucy made an implied misrepresentation.
2) Marcy may rescind the contract, but she may not recover damages because the situation involved a mutual mistake.
3) Marcy may recover damages, but she may not rescind the contract because Lucy made an implied misrepresentation.
4) Marcy may not rescind the contract or recover damages because Marcy made a unilateral mistake.
5) Marcy may rescind the contract, but she may not recover damages because Marcy made a unilateral mistake.