Which of the following would NOT likely justify the need for a mutual release in a real estate transaction?

The recognition that short deadlines would not typically justify the need for a mutual release stems from the nature of real estate transactions and the typical expectations of both parties involved. A mutual release is used to formally terminate an agreement between parties and is often necessary when there are fundamental disagreements or changes in circumstances that cannot be reconciled.

In scenarios where one party insists on a price reduction or seeks additional contingencies, these demands may create significant friction, prompting one or both parties to consider terminating the agreement altogether. However, when both parties can agree on a closing date, it indicates that there is mutual consent about a critical aspect of the transaction, suggesting that they are still on track to finalize the deal without the need for a release.

Short deadlines, while presenting pressure, do not inherently indicate a need to terminate the agreement. Instead, they may heighten the urgency for both parties to fulfill their obligations to meet the timeframe. Therefore, the requirement for a mutual release is less likely in situations involving tight schedules because it does not reflect an irreconcilable difference between the parties.