When a prospective purchaser offers a piece of his own property as security for part of the purchase price, does the prospective purchaser have a right of first refusal?

Of course, we recognize where the prospective purchaser offers a piece of his own property as security for part of the purchase price, the holder of the preemptive right can never offer identical terms. That circumstance should not foreclose the holder of the right of first refusal or his right would be illusory. But where different security is offered by each, it is not immediately apparent to the seller whether the security is comparable. Under these unusual circumstances, ⁸ the seller should have a reasonable time to ascertain whether the security offered is acceptable. That decision must be governed by a reasonable man standard. (See Kadner v. Shields (1971) 20 Cal.App.3d 251, 263, 97 Cal.Rptr. 742.) The disputed jury instruction generally set forth the law in conformity with the rules stated above and we hold the trial court did not err in giving that instruction.