William tells carol that he paid $150,000 for his farm in 2008 and that he believes it is worth twice that at the present time. relying upon these statements, carol buys the farm from william for $225,000. william did pay $150,000 for the farm in 2008, but its value has increased only slightly, and it is presently not worth $300,000. on discovering this, carol offers to reconvey the farm to william and sues for the return of her $225,000. result? modify the facts by assuming that william had paid $100,000 for the property in 2008. what is the result?

David paid $975,000 for two beachfront lots in coastal south carolina, with the intention of building residential homes on each. two years later, the south carolina legislature passed the beachfront management act, barring any further development of the coast, including david's lots. when david files a complaint to seek compensation for his property, south carolina refuses, pointing to a passage in david's own complaint that states "the beachfront management act [was] properly and validly designed to south carolina's " is south carolina required to compensate david under the takings clause?