GCR 1963, 118.3; Anderson v. Westwood Schools, 49 Mich. App. 406, 411; 212 N.W.2d 232 (1973). Nor are we convinced that plaintiffs failed to strictly comply with the terms of the option, as required by Michigan law. Rapanos v. Plumer, 41 Mich. App. 586, 588; 200 N.W.2d 462 (1972). Plaintiffs were prepared to tender payment upon receipt of a land contract and evidence of good title.
It is true, as defendants contend, that no contract is formed unless an acceptance is unambiguous and in strict conformance with an offer. Rapanos v Plumer, 41 Mich. App. 586; 200 N.W.2d 462 (1972); Harper Building Co v Kaplan, 332 Mich. 651; 52 N.W.2d 536 (1952). "But when the question is whether parties, by oral communication and by their acts, have entered into a contract the conclusion to be deduced is not one of law but of fact, and must be determined as such."
"`[S]trict compliance' with the terms of an option is the rule in Michigan." Rapanos v. Plumer, 41 Mich.App. 586, 588, 200 N.W.2d 462 (1972). However, a majority of state jurisdictions which subscribe to the same rule of law allow for equitable relief under special circumstances.