Furrow leased in writing a 100-acre farm from Quark for five years at $2,000 per year, with an option to purchase "five acres of the land for $10,000 cash" at the end of the lease term. Before the lease was executed, Quark orally promised to have a five-acre parcel surveyed before the end of the lease term. Furrow took possession of the farm and paid the rent for five years. During the fifth year, having decided that he would exercise the purchase option, Furrow planted several fruit trees and built a large grain silo on the property. At the end of the term, Furrow tendered Quark $10,000 and demanded a conveyance, but Quark repudiated the option agreement and retook possession of the farm. He had never had the five-acre parcel surveyed.In an action by Furrow against Quark for specific performance of the option agreement, which of the following is Quark's best defense?
The option part of the agreement is unenforceable because it lacked a separate consideration. The description of the property to be sold in the parties' written agreement is too indefinite to permit the remedy sought. Quark's failure to have the five-acre parcel surveyed was failure of a condition precedent to his own duty of performance. The option part of the agreement is unenforceable under the parol evidence rule.