Term
|
Definition
| a promise or set of promises for the breach of which the law gives a remedy or the performance of which the law in some way recognizes a duty |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| consists of an offer by one party, called the offeror, enter into a contract, and an acceptance of the terms of the offer by the other party, called the offeree |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| bargained-for exchange, what each party gets in exchange for his or her promise under the contract |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the legal ability to enter into a binding agreement |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the contract cannot be illegal or against public policy |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| when the acceptance of the agreement is secured through improper means, such as fraud, duress, undue influence, or misrepresentation |
|
|
Term
| Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) |
|
Definition
| set of commercial laws that could be applicable to all states, the UCC became the law in each state that adopted it in whole or part as an element of its state code |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the offeror wants a promise from the offeree to forma a binding contract, promise in exchange for a promise |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the offeror wants a performance to form the contract, the offeror wants the offeree to do something, not promise to do something |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| have all their terms clearly set forth in either written or spoken words |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| arise not from words but from the conduct of the parties |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| implied-in-law contracts, but not actual contracts, in order to prevent one party from being unjustly enriched at the expense of another |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| is one that contains all the legal elements of a contract |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| when there is some law the prohibits the courts from enforcing it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| not a contract either due to illegality or some defect that is so serious that it is not a contract |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| if one or both of the parties has the ability to either withdraw from the contract or enforce it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| once all the terms of the contract have been fully performed, the contract is said to have been executed |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| as long as some of the duties under the contract have not yet been performed, the contract is considered executory |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| those that have a special form or must be created in a specific manner, 4 types: contracts under seal, recognizances, letters of credit, negotiable instruments |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| parties using such documents are presumed to be adopting the seal for the contract |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| arises when a person acknowledges in court that he or she will perform some specified act or pay a price upon failure to do so |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an agreement by the person who issues the letter to pay a sum of money on receipt of an invoice and other documents |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| written documents, signed by a party that makes an unconditional promise to pay a specific sum of money on demand or at a certain time to the holder of the instrument |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| any contract that is not a formal contract is an informal contract or a simple contract |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| if a writing, or a term in question, appears to be plain and unambiguous on its face, its meaning must be determined from the four corners of the instrument without resort to extrinsic evidence, with the words given their ordinary meaning |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an agreement whereby the offeree gives the offeror a piece of consideration in exchange for the offeror's agreement to hold the offer open for the specified period of time |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| says that the terms of the acceptance must mirror the terms of the offer |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| provides that an acceptance is valid when it is placed in the mailbox, whereas a revocation is effective only when received by the offeree |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. manifestation of the offeror's intent to be bound
2. definite and certain terms
3. communication to an offeree |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. revocation by the offeror
2. rejection or counteroffer by the offeree
3. death or incapacity of the offeror
4. destruction or subsequent illegality of the subject matter of the offer
5. lapse of time or failure of other conditions stated in the offer |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| when a manifestation of intent to be bound to the terms of the offer is communicated to the offeror by the offeree |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| occurs when one party makes a promise knowing the other party will rely on it, the other party does rely on it, and the only way to avoid injustice is to enforce the promise |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| cause a party to make a promise regarding an unfinished project, that promise is valid consideration |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| if a party to a contract agrees to do additional work, the promise is valid consideration |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an agreement whereby the buyer agrees to purchase all his goods from one seller |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an agreement whereby the seller guarantees to sell everything she produces to one buyer |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| there is no dispute about the fact that money is owed and the amount of money owed |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the parties either dispute the fact that any money is owed or agree that some money is owed but dispute the amount |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. the debt is unliquidated
2. the creditor agrees to accept as full payment less than the creditor claims owed
3. the debtor pays the amount they have agreed on |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| something of value given in exchange for something else of value; it must be the product of a mutually bargained-for exchange |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. For a promise to be enforced by the courts, there must be consideration
2. exception: promisory estoppel
3. the courts seldom considers adequacy of consideration
4. an illusory promise is not consideration
5. past consideration is no consideration al all
6. a promise to do something that you already obligated to do is not valid consideration |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| third element of a legally binding contract, a person who has legal capacity to contract is one who has the mental ability to understand his or her rights and obligations under a contract and therefore will presumably be able to understand how to comply with the terms of the agreement |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| occurs when a party gives a loan at an interest rate exceeding the legal maximum |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| refers to agreements in which parties pay consideration for the chance, or opportunity, to obtain an amount of money or property |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| limit the types of business activities in which parties can legally engage on Sundays |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| 2 varities: noncompetition in employment, noncompetition in the sale of an ongoing business |
|
|
Term
| Unconscionable agreements |
|
Definition
| agreement in question is so unfair that it is void of conscience |
|
|
Term
| Procedural unconscionability |
|
Definition
| relates to conditions that would impair one party's understanding of a contract |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a contract created by a party to an agreement that is presented to the other party on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, presented as complete |
|
|
Term
| Substantive unconscionability |
|
Definition
| involves overly harsh or lopsided substance in an agreement, one-sided |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a statement releasing one of the parties to an agreement from all liability, regardless of who is at fault or what the injury suffered is |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| when both parties are equally responsible for an illegal agreement |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| divisible contracts are those that contain multiple parts which can each be performed seperately |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| one requiring complete performance by both parties, even if it appears as if the contract contains multiple parts |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. a minor
2. suffering from a mental deficiency that prevents the person from understanding the nature and obligations of contracts
3. intoxicated |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. has been adjudicated insane
2. has been adjudicated a habitual drunkard
3. has had a legal guardian appointed to enter into contracts on his or her behalf |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a promise to buy or sell that the courts will require parties to obey |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a circumstance that can cost businesses major profits when the sale is of a much larger scope than a single boat |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an erroneous belief about the facts of the contract at the time the contract is concluded |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the result of an error by one party about a material fact |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| shared by both parties to the agreement |
|
|
Term
| Unilateral mistakes requirements |
|
Definition
1. one party made a mistake about a material fact, and the other party either knew or had reason to know about the mistake
2. the mistake was caused by a clerical error that did not result from gross negligence
3. the mistake was so serious that the contract is unconscionable, that is , so unreasonable that it is outrageous |
|
|
Term
| Mutual mistake requirements |
|
Definition
1. basic assumption about the subject matter of the contract
2. material effect of the agreement
3. adverse effect on a party who did not agree to bear the risk of mistake at the time of the agreement |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an untruthful assertion by one of the parties about a material fact |
|
|
Term
| Innocent misrepresentation |
|
Definition
| results from a afalse statement about a fact material to an agreement that the person making the statement believed to be true |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the person who made the false statement had no knowledge of the falsity of the claim, then the person lacked scienter |
|
|
Term
| Negligent misrepresentation |
|
Definition
| results when the party making the statement would have known the truth about the fact had he used reasonable care to discover or reveal it |
|
|
Term
| Fraudulent misrepresentation |
|
Definition
| false representation of a material fact that is consciously false and intended to mislead the other party |
|
|
Term
| Intentional misrepresentation |
|
Definition
| the party making the misrepresentation either knows or believes that the factual claim is false or knows that there is no basis for the assertion |
|
|
Term
| Fraudulent misrepresentation requirements |
|
Definition
1. A false statement about a past or existing fact that is material to the contract
2. intent to deceive
3. justifiable reliance on the false statement by the innocent party to the agreement |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| involves the active hiding of the truth about a material fact |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a failure to provide pertinent information about the projected contract |
|
|
Term
| Nondisclosure equal to false assertion under these conditions |
|
Definition
1. a relationship of trust exists between the parties to the contract
2. there is failure to correct assertions of fact that are no longer true in light of events that have occurred since the initial consent to the terms of the agreement |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| refers to those special relationships in which one person has taken advantage of his or her dominant position in a relationship to unduly persuade the other person |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| is found when one party was forced into agreement by the wrongful act of another |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the disproportionate amount of power possessed by one party to the contract has made a mockery of the idea of free will |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| one made on the ground of unconscionability |
|
|
Term
| Things that can go wrong with a contract |
|
Definition
1. breach of contract
2. no agreement (no K)
3. fraud in the execution (U, V)
4. minor (v, V)
5. too intoxicated (v)
6. insane (U, v, V)
7. illegality (U, v, V)
8. duress (U, v, V)
9. bilateral mistake of fact (v)
10. unilateral mistake of fact (v)
11. concealment (v)
12. unconscionability (U, v, V)
13. undo influence (v)
14. misrepresentation (v)
15. statute of limitations (U)
16. statute of frauds (U)
17. bankrupcy (D, U)
18. lack of consideration (no K)
19. discharge (D)
20. fraud in the inducement (v) |
|
|
Term
| 2 Major Misconceptions about Statute of Frauds |
|
Definition
1. must be a written contract
CORRECT: can be written evidence
2. must be signed by both parties
CORRECT: must be signed by defendant |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. co-maker
2. surety
3. guarentor (BEST) |
|
|
Term
| Statute of Frauds Requirements |
|
Definition
1. oral promise
2. made to the creditor
3. secondary promise
4. admission in courts or in pleadings |
|
|
Term
| Oral contracts that fall within statute of frauds |
|
Definition
1. K for sale of land
2. cannot be completed in 1 year
3. promise to pay debt
4. promise made in consideration of marriage
5. pay debts of estate
6. sale of goods over $500 |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. rejection
2. revocation
3. lapse of time
4. condition subsequent
5. death of offeror or offeree (not all Ks, but all offers)
6. destruction of subject matter
7. subsequent illegality (legal before change in law) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. offer
2. promise to keep offer open
3. made by a merchant
4. in writing
5. for 3 months or less |
|
|
Term
| Things that happen to an offer |
|
Definition
1. accepted
2. rejected
3. revocation
4. terminated |
|
|
Term
| Situations that are not offers |
|
Definition
1. future offer (no present intent)
2. offers made in jest
3. preliminary negotiations
4. invitations
5. invitations and offer
6. inquiries
7. answers to inquiries |
|
|
Term
| Voidable contract stipulations |
|
Definition
1. misrepresentation
2. of a material fact
3. knowledge of that fact
4. intent to deceive
5. reliance
6. injury (not necessary) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. present, serious contractual intent
2. definiteness
3. communicated to offeree |
|
|
Term
| 6 basic requirement of a contract |
|
Definition
1. agreement
2. between competent parties
3. genuineness of assent
4. consideration
5. legal
6. in proper legal form, if any |
|
|
Term
| Kelsey-Hayes v. Galtaco Redlaw Castings Corp. |
|
Definition
Kelsey-Hayes sued Galtaco Redlaw Castings Corporation for a breach of contract. Two 30% increases were made to Kelsey-Hayes in order to keep Galtaco Redlaw in business and production running.
“must a person be subjected to an unlawful act such as threat of a tort or crime in order to make a claim of duress?”
No. Galtaco’s request for summary judgment was denied and declaratory judgment was granted in favor of Kelsey-Hayes. The Michigan federal district court had to utilize the doctrine of economic duress to analyze the situation, and it was deemed that the plaintiff was subjected to economic duress, therefore negating the terms of the 1989 agreements. |
|
|
Term
| School Trustees of Trenton v. Bennett |
|
Definition
The School Trustees of Trenton sued Bennett and Carlisle for the amount paid to build a schoolhouse that fell twice due to bad soil conditions.
Should the defendant, Bennett and Carlisle, be held liable for the destruction of the school-house for any reason other than good workmanship?
Ruled in favor of school trustees. |
|
|
Term
| Woodburn v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company |
|
Definition
Northwestern Bell then failed to include Woodburn in the yellow pages as the two parties had agreed. Woodburn sued in trial court of Iowa. The trial court ruled in favor of the defendant in that the telephone company had a defense against the damages claimed by the physician, Woodburn, due to the company’s failure to publish his company’s information in the yellow pages.
Can the plaintiff recover damages beyond those stipulated in the contract agreement?
The court ruled in favor of the telephone company in accordance with the contract. |
|
|
Term
| Lenawee County BOH v. Messerly |
|
Definition
Board of health shut down apartment complex due to sewage leak.
Are the Pickleses liable because of the “as is” clause in contractual agreement with the Messerlys?
Both parties were mutually mistaken of the value of the land property.
Yes, the Pickleses are liable due to the “as is” clause under the contract with the Messerlys |
|
|
Term
| Franconia Associaes et al v. US |
|
Definition
In 1997, Franconia Associated filed a law suit arguing that the Emergency Low Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 (ELIHPA)
Does the Emergency Low Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 (ELIHPA) under the Tucker Act violate the absolute prepayment right and constitute a breach of contract?
The Federal District Court ruled in favor of the United States. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The trustees sued Dartmouth’s secretary, Woodward, who had sided with the new appointees. This was an action of trover, for the trustees were hoping to regain old corporate property that was lost when their jobs were terminated.
: Did the 1816 acts of the New Hampshire legislature violate the contract clause of the U.S. Constitution? (Article I, Section 10, clause 1)
Yes, the N.H. laws did violate the contract clause. The court decided 5-1 for the plaintiff (Dartmouth) that the legislature of New Hampshire could not interfere with the Dartmouth’s contract. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., SFI herein, carried Taylor’s $50,000 liability coverage. When suit was filed in Phoenix trial court against Taylor by the Ring family for personal injuries, SFI represented Taylor and countered by filing suit against the Ring family for Taylor’s injuries.
1.) When did the plaintiff’s cause of action accrue? In other words, at what point was Taylor able to seek compensation from SFI.
No action shall lie against the company |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Victoria and Robert Hewitt had a common law marriage for 15 years when they filed for divorce which was not entertained due to lack of legal agreement.
Were Robert Hewitt’s assets, accumulated during the relevant time period, acquired through joint efforts?
No, Robert Hewitt and Victoria Hewitt did not enter into a valid contract. They did enter into an implied contract; however, this contract is void because it violates an Illinois statute. The court decided that they would not honor any marital contract that was not a legal license obtained through legal means. |
|
|
Term
| Sommers v. Putnam County Board of Education |
|
Definition
Sommers, the plaintiff sued the school board for the expenses of transporting his children to the nearest high school.
1. Was there a contract between the father of the four children and the school board, solely because the father benefited the school board by transporting his children to school?
The Supreme Court of Ohio found that the school board was being unjustly enriched by having Sommers transport his children with his own money. Understandably, the Court made the school board liable for Sommers expenses. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The pursuer, Armour, was a ship store merchant and the appellant, T.L. Duff & Co., were ship brokers. Armour held that T.L. Duff & Co. were the owners of the ship “Silvia” and were responsible for giving him an order.
What should be done when a creditor takes action against an agent?
The court dismissed the appeal and decided to not allow expenses up to the date of the Sheriff-substitute’s interlocutor. |
|
|
Term
| Amfac Resorts v. US Department of the Interior |
|
Definition
At that time, Amfac Resorts (along with three other companies) had current concessions contracts with the Yellowstone National Park, which were deeply affected by the 1998 Act.
should the 1998 Act have been approved?
The court ruled in favor of the defendants and rejected the concessionaire’s argument because of an implied right of renewal based on the Christian doctrine. |
|
|
Term
| The Mabley and Carew Co. v. Borden |
|
Definition
Ida C. Borden was the named beneficiary on the certificate and sought $ 780 for the wages and any interest that might have accrued after her sister passed in 1935. The Mabley and Carew Company denied the certificate, stating that it was given without consideration.
Was consideration given for the signed certificate?
Yes, Anna Work while maintaining employment by the Mabley and Carew Company shows consideration on her behalf for the certificate. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Hill and Waxberg’s business relationship was over and Hill hired a new contractor.
He sued for the cost of his services and expenses because although he delivered the F.H.A. loan, he wasn’t awarded the building contract.
Was there a contract? If there was, was it an “implied in fact” contract or an “implied in law” contract?
They decided on this lower amount by coming up with the value Hill received for Waxberg’s costs and services. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
When it came time for Libby to pay Thompson he refused, stating that Thompson had breached a verbal warranty regarding the quality of the logs. Thompson sued and demanded that Libby pay him the amount they agreed on previously in their contract. 1. Can parol, or verbal, contemporaneous evidence be used to contradict or change the conditions outlined by a written agreement or contract?
No. Parol contemporaneous evidence may not be used to negate the terms of a formal written contract. |
|
|
Term
| Lass Salt Garvin v. Pomeroy |
|
Definition
When T Inc. failed to pay the fees, Lass Salt Garvin was forced to sue the defendants to recover the unpaid fees
Were they contractually liable for these payments? Did it matter if they were/weren’t bound by contract?
The court ruled that even though they were not bound by a contract with T Inc., the defendants were still responsible for the unpaid fees to the plaintiff. |
|
|
Term
| Cole-McIntyre-Norfleet v. Holloway |
|
Definition
Holloway requested to place his order for the fifty barrels of cornmeal (as under terms of the offer) but was told by Cole the offer was rejected by the company. At this point prices for cornmeal had increased by fifty percent, making this an issue for Holloway’s store expenses.
Was Cole’s sixty days of silence in reference to the cornmeal offer, an act of implied acceptance to Holloway, making this a legitimate contract?
The offer made by Holloway to Cole became a contract due to the implication of silence. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
From December 1989 through February 1990, problems surfaced with regards to GTE’s ability to handle the call volume required to fulfill all the orders.
Florafax continued its claim against GTE where Florafax received $1,481,000 in net damages from the court ruling in the Tulsa County District Court
• Should GTE be held responsible for all losses they imposed onto Florafax/Bellerose? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Pennzoil sues Texaco for damages in regards to a tortious interference3 with contract. Pennzoil argues the Memorandum of Agreement was a binding contract due to the signees collectively controlling the majority of outstanding shares. Whereas Texaco states that it was not binding due to it was subject to approval and if unapproved it would terminate on its own terms.
The courts found that there was a binding agreement between Pennzoil and Getty Oil for Pennzoil’s purchase of Getty Oil; Texaco knew of the agreement and intentionally induced a breach of contract. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
After receiving the letter, the defendant Schaefer then refused to sell his land, so Langellier sued for the equitable remedy of specific performance of the contract
Is there a valid contract based on the letters sent between Langellier and Schaefer?
the contract is invalid |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The contractor on the construction of the home defaulted after the bank had already paid out the original construction loans proceeds and part of the second mortgage.
The Vogans brought a lawsuit to recover the funds that they had spent according to what the appraisal company had said.
Were the Vogans third-party beneficiaries of the contract between MidAmerica and Hayes Appraisal?
Yes, The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the court of appeals and reinstated the judgment of the district court because the Vogans could recover as third-party beneficiaries. |
|
|
Term
| US ex rel Coastal Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Algeron Blair Incorporated |
|
Definition
The United States was looking to construct a naval hospital, so they entered a construction contract with the Defendant, Algernon Blair.
Algernon looked to Coastal to supply certain equipment that was needed (in relation to the contract) and to help with steel erection.
Plaintiff stopped work on the project because the Defendant refused to pay for crane rental. This led to the Plaintiff suing for services rendered
Can a plaintiff whose expectation damage is zero or less, recover on a breach of contract?
Yes, the judgment was reversed through restitution and for being in breach of contract. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Zeidenberg formed his own company and made the SelectPhone information available for download on the internet at his website for a lower price, essentially devastating ProCD’s market.
Did Zeidenberg violate the Copyright Act or the Wisconsin Computer Crimes Act by redistributing data from a copyrighted software program on the internet?
Yes, the licensing agreement between Zeidenberg and ProCD met the six basic requirements of a contract and therefore valid and enforceable. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Once this permit was granted, the defendant refused to allow the plaintiff to lease any space in the new building. City Stores Co. sued Ammerman for specific performance.
Can the court grant a specific performance of a contract since there was much negotiation to be done regarding the lease?
Yes, the court can grant specific performance of a contract. |
|
|
Term
| Karl Wendt v. International Harvester |
|
Definition
The plaintiff (Wendt) did not receive a franchise and sued for breach of contract. As a defense the defendant raised the issues of frustration of purpose and impracticability. Frustration of purpose claims that an unforeseen event interrupts the contracts original purpose and impracticability claims that the continuation of the contract has become meaningless or impractical thus allowing for the termination of the contract.
Does a change in market conditions, such as a huge loss of profit, constitute impracticability?
No, a change in market conditions does not constitute impracticability. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Plante and Jacobs formed a written contract to establish the terms of the new house.The defendant countersued for no substantial performance, breach of contract, damages due to faulty workmanship and incomplete construction.
Is the plaintiff entitled to the remainder of the money outlined in the contract?
decided in favor of the plaintiff, Plante. |
|
|
Term
| Springer v. Great Western Railway |
|
Definition
the plaintiff agreed to ship 198 baskets of tomatoes The agreement contained a clause exempting the defendant “from liability for any loss, damage, or delay which may arise during the carriage of such ... goods by sea, from the Act of God, the King's enemies, fire, … and all and every other dangers and accidents of the seas, rivers, and navigation, of whatever nature and kind soever”
Because of the strike it was impossible to ship the goods by rail until it ended.
The plaintiff, Springer, sued the defendant, Great Western Railway Company, for breach of contract.
Did the defendant breach its contract to carry the goods and deliver them in substantially the same condition?
Yes, the defendant’s sale of the plaintiff’s goods was a breach of its contract to carry and deliver goods to London. |
|
|
Term
| Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School District |
|
Definition
Odorizzi was arrested for homosexual activity, The two men allegedly told Odorizzi that if he resigned, the school district would not pursue the matter further; however if he did not resign, he would “suffer extreme embarrassment and humiliation”. Odorizzi signed the resignation that day
resignation was made under duress
Was the resignation of Donald Odorizzi obtained by the use of undue influence?
in favor of Odorizzi |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Joseph Dodson purchased a used truck from Burns and Mary Shrader, owners and operators of Shrader’s Auto Sales
Dodson started experiencing mechanical problems, specifically a burnt valve.
it was struck on the front left fender by another vehicle in a hit-and-run. This occurred before the circuit court could even hear the case.
Is a minor entitled to receive full compensation for the damage to goods sold or is the seller entitled to a setoff for the depreciated value of the truck while it was in the minor’s possession?
The court held that as long as the seller does not commit any overreaching, fraud, or unfair advantage, he or she is entitled to reasonable compensation for the use of, depreciation, or willful or negligent damage to goods sold while in the possession of a minor. |
|
|
Term
| Ortelere v. Teacher's Retirement Board |
|
Definition
Ortelere took leave after a nervous breakdown.Without the knowledge of her husband, Ortelere wrote a letter on February 11, 1965 and applied to the Teacher’s Retirement Board to have the benefit plan to be paid “without option”, therefore receiving the maximum benefits while she was alive of $8,760. This left nothing for her family following her death, and a net loss of over $60,000 in standing credit.
Francis B. Ortelere (respondent), sued the Teachers’ Retirement Board (Appellant) to void changes in the benefit plan because his wife was considered mentally incompetent at the time of her decision.
1.) Can a binding contractual agreement be reversed and voided for incapacity due to a known mental illness?
The New York Supreme Court found Grace Ortelere to be mentally incompetent and unable to make voluntary decisions to change her retirement benefit plan. |
|
|
Term
| Arizona Department of Revenue v. Blaze Construction Company |
|
Definition
The Department claimed that Blaze failed to pay Arizona’s transaction privilege tax on the earnings from the contracts with the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The issue at hand is whether a state can impose a transaction privilege tax on a contractor that is in a contract with the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The court answered the issue by holding that yes, you can tax a contractor that is in a contract with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. |
|
|
Term
| Hercules, Inc. et al. v. United States |
|
Definition
As Agent Orange was found to be toxic and human exposure caused various health problems, Vietnam War veterans and their families filed lawsuits against nine manufacturers in the late 1970s. In an attempt to recover these costs, these two manufacturers then filed lawsuit against the US government under the Tucker Act.
Can Hercules Inc. et al get reimbursement from the Government to recover their costs spent in defending and settling third-party tort claims under the Tucker Act based on alternative theories of contractual indemnification and warranty of specifications?
With a 6-2 vote, the Supreme Court held that the chemical manufacturers could not recover based on their contractual indemnification and warranty of specifications claims. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This case was claimed to be a constitutional issue because the fees that these nonmembers are paying were being used towards union litigations outside of the control of a certain local section of the union.
). In this case, Daniel Locke (nonmember representative), the petitioner, took Edward Karass (state controller) the defendant, to court.
Is a pooling arrangement for “extra-unit”, collective bargaining litigation expenses constitutional?
Yes, a pooling arrangement for extra-unit, collective bargaining litigation expenses is constitutional. |
|
|
Term
| Adarand Constructors v. Pena |
|
Definition
DOT was offering Mountain Gravel additional compensation if they selected a company controlled by a “socially and economically disadvantaged” person, determined by standards of the Small Business Administration. Because of this affirmative action program, Mountain Gravel chose to hire Gonzales Construction instead.
Plaintiff, Adarand Constructors, Inc. sued the defendant, the United States Department of Transportation
1. On what basis should the court evaluate the constitutionality of the government incentivizing subcontracting jobs to be given to “disadvantaged” businesses?
In the Adarand case, a compelling government interest was present given the applied standard of strict scrutiny and therefore, did not violate the 5th and 14th Amendments. |
|
|
Term
| Reid v. Key Bank of Southern Maine, Inc. |
|
Definition
Reid approached Key Bank of Southern Maine, Inc. for the money and they granted a series of loans to jump-start the business.
The bank denied receiving the check from the Naval Station and took two-thirds of the check from Nickerson & O’Day to pay off some of the debt without Reid’s permission.all of his vehicles were repossessed as well as his home. Reid filed for bankruptcy, Mrs. Reid left him and suffered from emotional problems and turned to drugs.
The Reid’s did not take Key Bank to court until 1986. The statute of limitations for many of the counts was two years; therefore those were thrown out almost immediately.
Is there a breach of implied good faith contained in the March loan agreement?
The exemplary charges were not awarded to the Reid’s and Key Bank correctly handled the checks paid to Paul Reid. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
: Michelle sued Lee looking to get compensated for what Lee did not give her. She was looking for alimony as well as half the property that they had or received while they were living together. . She was suing based on the fact that they entered into an oral contract when Lee said he would support her until she died.
Does enforcing this contract go against public policy?
While back down in the trial courts, Michelle was awarded 104 thousand dollars of compensation and rights to half of Lee’s property gained during their relationship. |
|
|
Term
| Paramount Communications v. QVC Network, Inc. |
|
Definition
After making sure that the bid was serious and Paramount did not violate any of the provisions of the contract with Viacom they discussed the proposed agreement with QCV at a board meeting. These led to an aggressive battle to begin between QVC and Viacom for the merger with Paramount
Thus the board of directors for paramount gave preferential treatment to the Viacom bid, even though the monetary gain would have been better for stockholders if they had accepted the QVC bid.
the Board of Directors for Paramount Communications violated their fiduciary duty to the stockholders of Paramount Communications when they rejected QVC bid for merger by not fully considering it.
Finally, the court ruled that deal with Viacom did in fact fail the Revlon duties and was thus invalid. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
New York Baseball There was no evidence of wrongdoing or violations committed by the Plaintiff. McQuade filed suit against Stoneham for specific performance. McQuade cited the agreement stating that “best endeavors” would be used to maintain positions.
1. What are the legal duties of corporate directors to independently make decisions concerning the business of a corporation?
The Court of Appeals of New York reversed the award of damages and dismissed McQuade’s claim, ending his case. |
|
|
Term
| McLouth Steel Corp v. Jewell Coal and Coke Co. |
|
Definition
. As a result of the increase in demand, Jewell was unable to meet the requirements stated in the contract. McLouth Steep Corporation then issued an injunction, a judicial process operating in personam, and requiring person to whom it is directed to do or refrain from doing a particular act. This injunction required Jewell to supply coke as ordered and to build the facilities necessary to do so.
1. Is the Contract subject to Michigan law or Connecticut law?
Is the Contract “unambiguous” as stated by the previous ruling?
The District Court of Appeals found that the contract was subject to Michigan law, that the contract was ambiguous, and that it is an enforceable contract under Michigan Law but with a few modifications from the judgment. |
|
|
Term
| Petersen v. Pilgrim Village |
|
Definition
Petersen believes Pilgrim Village made at least $200,000 in profits and believed a reasonable amount of his share to be 10% ($20,000). Petersen was never paid any additional money other than his yearly salary, and sued Pilgrim Village for breach of contract.
Did Pilgrim Village’s verbal agreement with Petersen qualify as a contract?
Was “profit sharing” too vague to be considered consideration for Pilgrim Village?
: The court found no evidence that the employer had agreed to pay Petersen “the reasonable value of additional services that he rendered.” |
|
|
Term
| Glover v. Jewish War Veterans of the United States Post No. 58 |
|
Definition
Based on the information that Mary Glover presented to the police, Glover’s daughter and Reginald Wheeler were found on June 13th and Wheeler was arrested for the murder. After Glover previously talked with the police, she learned of the reward that the Jewish War Veterans put in the news paper. The Jewish War Veterans refused transfer the reward to Glover based on the fact that she did not know of the reward prior to speaking with the police.
• Is it possible to receive a reward from a private non-governmental party without having knowledge of the reward? In general terms: Is it possible to accept an offer for a contract without knowing of the offer?
It is not possible receive a reward without knowing of its existence. |
|
|
Term
| T.M. Cobb Co v. Superior Court |
|
Definition
Windows poorly constructed, back forth offer, counter offer
Cobb Company received the letter saying that the real parties were revoking their offer, but on the same day the T.M. Cobb Company accepted the original offer pursuant to section 998.
Can the offeror voluntarily revoke their offer prior to the offeree accepting it under section 998?
He came to this conclusion based on contract law which says that an offeror can revoke an offer any time prior to the offeree’s acceptance. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The plaintiffs refused to leave their establishment, but in the short time the plaintiff was hospitalized, defendant Lurvey began the process of remodeling the house and moving in his material assets. Rose took Lurvey to Michigan trial court to contend that the gross inadequacy of consideration by the defendant mandated the cancellation of the land contract assignment and the quitclaim deed, as well as receive damages caused by the defendant’s remodeling.
• Is the plaintiff entitled to damages as a result of the defendant’s unauthorized occupation of the residence?
The Court of Appeals of Michigan ruled that in regards to the equity at stake, the gross inadequacy of consideration mandates the cancellation of the quitclaim deed and land contract assignment made with the defendant. |
|
|
Term
| Kirk Williams Co v. Six Industries |
|
Definition
Six Industries, Inc. (“Six Industries”), a general contractor, was contracted to oversee the construction of the Credit Life Insurance Building in Springfield Ohio.
The only relevant fact stemming from the delay is that Kirk Williams claimed delay damages against Six Industries, meaning they sought a monetary payment to cover losses brought by the delay.
Kirk Williams filed civil suit in the Court of Common Pleas of Clark County, Ohio requesting delay damages as well as a declaratory judgment that the restrictive endorsement on Six Industries’ check
Was the trial court correct in failing to grant declaratory judgment to Kirk Williams, that the deposit of the check was not an accord and satisfaction?
The decision of the trial court was REVERSED and REMANDED by the appellate court. |
|
|
Term
| Seattle TImes Co. v. Tielsch |
|
Definition
Guest Guesser
The Seattle Times took action against Tielsch, claiming that while consideration and prize may exist, the contest requires skill and not chance in order to win.
Does the Guest-Guesser contest violate Section 24 of Seattle Ordinance No. 16046 in which The Seattle Times is conducting an illegal lottery?
The trial court was correct in holding that the contest in question is a lottery within the meaning of the ordinance and RCW 9.59.010 |
|
|
Term
| McCutcheon v. United Homes Corp. |
|
Definition
McCutcheon was injured as a result of the fall. The plaintiff sued United Homes Corporation for negligence in maintaining a safe “common area” because the lights were not working at both the top and bottom of the stairs which she fell down.
• Is a lessor of a multi-family residential complex able to include an exculpatory clause in a rental contract that removes the lessor’s liability of injuries sustained by tenant resulting from negligence of in maintaining common areas?
United Homes Corporation has a duty of reasonable care to maintain common areas for protection of tenants. |
|
|
Term
| Vokes v. Arthur Murray Inc. |
|
Definition
Rediscovery through dance, She asked for the courts to find the remaining contracts to be void and null as she felt the defendants fully knew and withheld the truth of her ability intending to deceive her into purchasing extra classes.
1) In order for a misrepresentation to be actionable does it have to be one of fact or can it be of opinion?
So if the opinions fraudulently induce a contract, the contract can be cancelled. |
|
|
Term
| Petry v. Cosmopolitan SPA Inernational, Inc. |
|
Definition
. Petry brought suit against the spa on January 14, 1981, in the circuit Court of Hamilton County against the appellees for damages for personal injuries resulting from the appellees’ alleged negligence in maintaining the exercise machine, leaving the machine in a dangerous condition.
Was the exculpatory clause in the contract between Petry and Cosmopolitan valid and did it remove Cosmopolitan from all liability resulting from the accident? Was the clause assignable to Holiday?
The exculpatory clause ensured that the Cosmopolitan Spa had no liability and that the clause transferred to the assignee, Holiday. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Armstead expressly promised Roper that the brickwork he would be doing would, as closely as possible, match the existing bricks both in color and in appearance. Once the project was completed by Armstead, Roper did not feel as though the new brickwork matched the existing brickwork as well as they had originally agreed upon
What was the severity of Armstead’s breach of contract?
The past precedent in similar cases had always been that a contractor may recover the agreed contract price for performing the assigned task substantially but would also be subject to a deduction for damages if any minor details of the contract were not fulfilled by the contractor. |
|
|
Term
| McDonald's Corporation v. United States |
|
Definition
McDonald built and began operating a restaurant at the Navy Exchange in Naples, Italy. Soon a dispute over beef supplies erupted. McDonald discontinued operations based upon the claim of United States (“Government”) breach of contract. McDonald then filed a suit in the Claims Court against the government seeking damages from the alleged breach of contract.
Did the 1970 amendment to the Tucker Act by Congress mean to waive sovereign immunity for contractual disputes originating from commercial contracts negotiated and signed by NAVRESSO.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the dismissal of the United States Claims Court. They ruled that the Tucker Act was applicable in this case. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| getting full amount back by return whatever is returnable |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| get back only what returned item is worth |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| promise to not do something |
|
|
