One correction

There was a mistake in my previous post, and that shows how rusty my contract knowledge is. :D

Regarding his acceptance of your counter-offer, he said that he accepted the counter-offer but would take one more look. I would explain this as a conditional acceptance which constitutes a rejection so that your counter-offer was expired. His subsequent fax constituted a brand new offer which you have the power to accept or reject. This is called mirror image rule under common law. However, a court could interpret this one more look thing as totally separated from his acceptance, since nobody knows what his actual intent was at the time of the acceptance. In that case, a contract was formed but would not be enforceable. The reliance part is true, regardless of whethere there is a contract or not.