If John's mother signs a deed based on a misunderstanding, what legal theory allows her to plead a lawsuit?

The correct choice relates to "Fraud in the inception," which occurs when a party is deceived about the very nature of the contract they are entering into. In John's mother's case, if she signed a deed based on a misunderstanding, it indicates that there may have been some form of deception, which misled her about the fundamental aspects of what she was consenting to. This could mean she was unaware of the true nature or consequences of the deed itself, making it possible for her to seek legal recourse on the basis that her consent was obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation.

This legal theory reinforces the idea that valid consent must be informed and free from misleading information. If she can demonstrate that she was misled about significant details of the deed, she may have grounds for a lawsuit to void the transaction or seek damages due to that misunderstanding.

The other options, while relevant in different contexts, do not fit this scenario as closely. Negligence involves a failure to exercise proper care, which does not apply to a misunderstanding due to fraud. Breach of trust pertains to the violation of fiduciary duties and does not cover misunderstandings in contract agreements. Duress involves coercion or threats forcing someone to act against their will, which is different from a misunderstanding