One signature is not a contract

Your analysis is logical, but based on the wrong premise that a lease with one signature is somehow binding.  No, although there is such a thing called unilateral contract （mosly public reward for some desired action), a lease is never unilateral and requires two signatures.  It is called an agreement, which needs two parties to agree.

Our LZ's problem is that he doesn't know if the other party signs the lease, and it is to her advantage to sign it given LZ's intention.  

You suggestion is otherwise sound.

所有跟帖： 

• That is not entirely true -jingxi02- ♀ (1884 bytes) () 03/23/2016 postreply 08:59:28

• A contract signed by one party is called "offer" -檸檬椰子汁- ♂ (768 bytes) () 03/23/2016 postreply 10:15:43

• That is exactly what "Pending" means -jingxi02- ♀ (1498 bytes) () 03/23/2016 postreply 11:13:58

• don't reinvent the wheel -檸檬椰子汁- ♂ (571 bytes) () 03/23/2016 postreply 13:05:33

• Knowing the reality is more important -jingxi02- ♀ (424 bytes) () 03/23/2016 postreply 15:23:22