contracts a contract is based on promises voluntarily made
TRANSCRIPT
Contracts
A contract is based
on promises voluntarily
made
Do all promises
give rise tocontractual
obligations?
•Offer•Acceptance•Consideration•Capacity•Legality
•Unilateral and bilateral •Expressed and implied•Valid•Void and voidable•Unenforceable
PROMISE
FOR ANACT
Reward isan
example
Reward isan
example
PROMISEFOR A
PROMISE
ART AGREES TO PAINT HOUSE AND BOB AGREES TO PAY
$1,000.
ART AGREES TO PAINT HOUSE AND BOB AGREES TO PAY
$1,000.
Bill and Linda meet at a party. He was
74, and she was 49. A month later, they
started to talk about marriage. Linda was
concerned about quitting her job, and Bill said he would give her
whatever she needed. One day, she walked into the bathroom with a
handwritten note containing financial terms for a marriage, and he signed it. They got married, but Bill filed for divorce 1 ½ years later.
What is the issue?
Does the contract given to and signed by
the husband in the bathroom constitute a valid and enforceable agreement that was
freelyentered into?
What kind of agreement was it, unilateral or
bilateral?
It was unilateral because it was
an agreement to
marry.
How did the court
rule?
To be enforceable, the agreement must be freely entered into
without duress or undue influence. When marriage is contemplated,
the parties must do so knowing of the assets of the other. In this
case, the parties never disclosed their assets, liabilities or income. The husband also never had the chance to consult an attorney.
Therefore, the agreement is not enforceable.
•Stated in direct terms•Can be written or oral
I will sell you my sports car for $25,000
When you go to the
doctor, you impliedly
agree to pay for services.
Plaintiffs cared for the decedent for
several months before he died. They
claimed they were promised payment
for services. Defendant maintains that
they are a family member so services
were gratuitously rendered.
Contract implied-in–fact is to prevent unjust result. Normally, there is a presumption
that services rendered by a family member are free. However, contract may be implied
when service are performed with expectation of payment. In this case, plaintiffs can point
to no evidence that they agreed upon a price with the decedent, what form
payment would take, or when payment would be made, so a contract should
not be implied.
Satisfies all requirements
of an
enforceable agreement
Binds one party but gives the other option to withdraw
Element of contract has
no legal force or effect
ILLEGALCONTRACT
Satisfies elements of a valid contract but won't be enforced
by court
Most contractsare oral in nature
and can be enforceable.
The major problem with oral contracts is proving the existence
of the agreement.
Oral contracts require the courts
to assess the credibility of the
parties.
Are agreements where people pool their money
to buy lottery tickets enforceable or illegal
betting contracts?
Two sisters signed an agreement that they would
share the winnings ina lottery. A winning ticket
was bought for $500,000 and one of the sisters did not
get a share and sued.
What is the law in Connecticut
on bettingcontracts?
All wagers in which the consideration is money won or bet shall be void.
What didthe plaintiff
argue?
The agreement was not a betting contract but a
mutual agreement to share profits from legal
forms of gambling.
What didthe court
say?
The law was not applicable tothis case because the parties
were not betting but promising to share equally in the winnings
they received fromlegalized gambling.
Proposal by one party to another manifesting an intention to enter into a
valid contract
•Intent to contract•Terms must be definite•Offer must be communicated
This is an
objective test
Plaintiff purchased 15 cans of Pepsiand then borrowed $700,000
which he sent to Pepsi in exchangefor the jet. Pepsi sent the money
back claiming that their adwas only a joke.
“ No objective person could reasonably conclude that
commercial actually offered consumer a Harrier Jet. The possibility that it could be
bought for $700,000 was the first clue
that the deal was too good to be
true.”
•Subject matter•Quantity•Price
Advertisement at a stated
price is merely
invitationto negotiate
FRAUDULENT
ADVERTISING
IS ILLEGAL
How long does an
offer stay open?
An offer can be revoked anytime
before its acceptance, or it
can terminated by its own terms.
I will give you 5 days
to make up your mind. At the end of
that period, the offer
terminates.
An acceptance is a manifestation by the offeree tobe bound by the
terms of the offer.
Acceptance is valid only when it has
been communicated to the offeror andis unconditional.
I can’t afford $1,000 but I will give you $800.
A counter offer rejectsthe original offer andbecomes an offer that the other person can
accept or reject.
The defendant refused to pay on a life insurance policy
following a fatal car accident. The carrier argued that a contract was not formed
before the husband's death.
The defendant offered accidental death insurance with a mortgage.
Once enrolled, the insured would get a certificate that had an effective date. The plaintiff mailed the form on April 5 and was killed on April 22. Carrier argued that
form was only an offer to contract that was accepted with the issuance of the
policy.
An insurance application is an offer which the insurer
may accept or reject. In this case, however, a reasonable person would have thought
that the enrollment form was the offer that she would
accept by completing and mailing the form back. This was an enrollment form and
not an application.
constituteacceptance?
Can
CAN I MAIL YOU AN INSURANCE POLICY AND SAY “IF I DON’T HEAR
FROM YOU, WE HAVE A DEAL”?
Offeror has no power to impose duty upon offeree
to act.
RECORD CLUB
If a person makes the highest
bid at an auction, is that bid a mere offer or
an acceptance?
Well…it depends.
•With Reserve•Without Reserve
2/1 make offer2/2 receive offer2/3 mail acceptance2/4 mail revocation2/5 receive revocation2/6 receive acceptance
What is the effect of a fax to the agent of a seller to
the agent of the buyer when there is no record
of the receipt for the transmission?
The agent for the buyer claims that he faxed an agreement
of sale to the seller but had noproof that the transmission
went through. The seller claims that he called and saidthat he no longer wanted to
sell the property.
What is the law
on faxes?
Acceptance by telephone orfax is governed by the same
rules as when the parties are in each other’s presence. The
communication must be substantially instantaneous and
the communication must be two way.
For the communication to be two-way, one party must be able to readily determine that the offeree is aware of the communication. If not, then the mailbox rule will apply. Since
there was no proof in this case thatthe fax was sent, the burden is on the partywho sent the transmission to prove it. The burden has not been meet in this case, so
there is no contract.
THAT SOMETHINGMUST HAVE
LEGAL VALUE
BENEFIT CAN BE ASERVICE
BENEFIT DOES
NOT HAVETO BE
ECONOMIC
•Illusory promise•Moral obligation•Past consideration
An illusory promise
is one in which the act of
performance is left solely up to
one party.
I will buy as many books from you
as I want at $10a book.
A moral obligation is
insufficient to support
consideration.
A parent promise to give his son $1,000out of love and
affection.
Past consideration is
a current promise to pay
for something in the past.
Jim promises on his death bed to
give John $10,000 for the
help he has given over the
years.
BUILDER AGREED TO DO NOTHING MORE FOR
PROMISE TO PAY MORE MONEY
Is the cosigner of a loan, primarily
orsecondarily liable
in case of a default?
•Surety•Guarantor
I will giveI will giveyou $100 onyou $100 on
your birthdayyour birthday
Elvis agreed to pay for the divorce of the mother of his former girlfriend and to pay
off the mortgage on her home.Plaintiff then filed for divorce and
agreed to give her husband the equity in her house for his turning over the deed
to her. Presley then died beforepaying the obligations and the Estate
refused to honor the agreement.
Why is Elvis’ promise to pay the obligations of his mother’s girlfriend
supported by consideration?
A promise which a person should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance on the part of the other and
which does induce such action is binding if injustice
can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise.
While Presley’s promise induced the plaintiff to assume the
mortgage as part of the settlement agreement, it was not binding until approved
by the court. So, the plaintiff's reliance was not justified.
A party who does have capacity to
contract but lacks mutual assent to
bargain.
Mere psychological or emotional
problems are not enough.
CHILD MUST DISAFFIRMWITHIN REASONABLE
TIME AFTER REACHING MAJORITY
Milicic was an 18 year old basketball player and the second round pick of
the Detroit Pistons. He entered into an
endorsement contract when he was 16 whereby the defendant would pay
Milicic money and products in exchange for endorsements. Four days after he turned 18, Milicic tried to buy out his contract, but the defendant refused. He then disaffirmed the contract and began returning everything he had
received.
Pennsylvania allows minors to disaffirm a contract unless it is for a necessary as long
as it is done within a reasonable time after
reaching majority.
Milicic was a child living in a foreign country when he signed the contract.
Minors should notbe bound by their
mistakes.
.An illegal contract is one that calls for the
performance of a crime, tort or is against
public policy.
An illegal contract is
void
Is an unlicensedentity that performs services without a
license void?
The person maybe precluded from
recovering a feefor his services.
Farrell was an architect who worked on a condo project of the defendant for 25% of the profits.
Some of the work was done in Michigan where he was licensed,
and some of the work was done in Idaho were he was not licensed.
Farrell was fired, and the defendant refused to pay him, claiming that the contract was
illegal since Farrell was not licensed in that state.
Idaho does not allow a court to aid a party to an illegal
contract. The state requiresan architect to be licensed in order to practice in that
state.
.Such statutes must be narrowly construed. Since Farrell was not licensed in Idaho before 2/17/04,
service rendered before then wereillegal. His services after getting
a license were legal, and he isentitled to payment for them.
PROBLEM THREE - B
Estelle played in a tournament.A hole in one was rewarded with a car. Estelle’s ball was
rolling into the hole when a frogjumped out and hit the ball. The
judge disallowed the shot.
Contract says judge shall be sole arbiter
of dispute
Contest rules say judge makes final decision over
disputes, and he ruled the shot no good. “In and through”
means “completely through.” The decision of the judge is binding
unless fraud, gross mistake or lack of good faith.
ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE IN GLOBAL AND NATIONAL COMMERCE ACT
Electronic signature
is valid
•Specially made goods•Goods received by buyer•Person admits oral contract•Unjust enrichment
The purpose of the Code is tomake uniform laws involving
commercial transactions involving sales, banking
and secured transactions.
The Code has nothing to do
with real estatetransactions.
Article Two dealswith the sale
of goods.
A merchant isa person who deals
with goods of that kind.
Joe brings his wife’s engagement ring to the jeweler to have it reset as a surprise gift. The merchant
mistakenly sells the ring to a customer. Can Joe get the
ring back?
Section 2-403 provides that anyone who gives possession of goods
to a merchant who deals in goods of that kind provides
that business with the power to transfer all rights of the owner
to a buyer in the ordinary course of business.
Why is this the rule?
•It protects the innocent buyer who believes the merchant has legal title to the goods because they are in the merchant’s possession.•The concept allows for the free flow of commerce.
What would happen if youbrought a car to a mechanic to fix a flat tire and the gas
station sells the car to someone?
Gas station is not in the business of selling
cars, so the original owner would be able to
get the car back.
Who bears the risk of loss when the
goods are damaged or lost is important.
Surprisingly,it does notdepend onwho owns the goods.
Section 2-509 governswho has the risk of loss in the absenceof an agreement.
Need to determineif it is a shipment
or destinationcontract.
When the contract requires the seller to ship the goods, risk
of loss willpass to the buyer when conforming
goods are delivered to the carrier.
When the contract requires the seller to deliver the goods to a specific destination,
the risk of loss will not pass until the goods are delivered to that
destination.
Tyler’s Sports Bar and Grillordered 100 cases of
imported beer from a vendor in Baltimore FOB Shipment. The beer is picked up by a trucking company at the
seller’s place of business, the truck overturns en route,
and the beer is destroyed. Who has the risk of loss?
Since this is a shipment contract,
the risk of loss passed to the buyer as soon as the beer
was given to the trucking company.
If it was a destination
contract, the risk of loss remains with the seller
until the beer is delivered to Tyler’s
Bar.
When the goods are delivered to a third person to
hold, this is a bailment and the third person is a
bailee.
When the goods are subject to a bill of lading, the risk of loss
passes to the buyer upon receipt of the documents.
If the goods are not covered by
documents of title, then the risk passes to the buyer when the bailee tells the
buyer that the buyer has the right to
possession.
The last rule is when the goods are in possession of the
seller and the buyer is to pick them up at the store. If the seller is a
merchant, the risk passes to the buyer
only on receipt of the goods.
Tyler’s buys 2 large screen televisions from Best Buy. The boxes
don’t fit into Joe’s car so the store agrees
to hold them while Joe rents a truck. Before Joe can pick them up, there
is a fire in the store and the televisions are destroyed. Who has the risk of loss?
The seller is a merchant, so the risk passes to the buyer only on receipt of
the goods. The goods were not yet
picked up so the store is responsible.
Suppose Joe buys a television from his neighbor and tells
the seller that he will pick up the set the
following week.A thief breaks into
the house and steals the set. Who has the
risk of loss?
In this case, the neighbor is not a merchant so the risk passed to
the buyer at the time of sale.
Wilsonvs.
BrawnPage 198
Plaintiff bought items from Brawn’s catalog and paid an insurance fee. He then
suedthe seller, claiming that the fee was illegal since
the buyer did not need the insurance since it did not
have the risk of loss.
A shipment contract is the normal contract in the
absence of an agreement to the contrary. The term CIF
means that the price includes the cost, insurance
and freight. This is a shipment contract and risk
of loss passes upon delivery to the shipper. The buyer bears the risk of loss in
transit.
Under the Uniform Commercial Code,
every contract under the Code
imposes an obligation of good
faith.
For instance, if an element of the
contract is missing, such as the price, the Code mandates that
the price will be what is reasonable at the
time of delivery.
If one of the parties to the contract is a
merchant, the UCC states that an offer by the
merchant to buy or sell goods which states that
the offer will remain open is not revocable even
though no consideration is paid for the promise.
Certain types of contracts must be in writing and be signed.
Purpose is to prevent perjury
when no agreement ever existed
in the first place.
•Cannot be performed in one year•Sale or lease of land•Liable for debt of another•Sale of goods over $500
Businesses act through their agents
whether it is an employee or third party, and these agents have the
power to enter into contracts on behalf of their principles.
Apparent authority involves those cases where the master’s
conduct would lead a reasonable person to
conclude that the agent is clothed with
authority to act on the master’s behalf.
Is a mortgage broker acting on behalf of the bank in order to bind that institution under the theory of apparent
authority or is the broker merely a middle
man?
Gainesvs.
Kelly
Kelly signed an agreement with Thompson to assist him in
obtaining financing for land. Thompson went to Gaines, an officer of the bank, about the
transaction. Gaines gave him a loan application that was given to Kelly and returned completed. The bank issued a 30 day commitment upon receipt of a title report. The report showed that Kelly did not
have an ownership interest in the land, and no additional evidence
was given by Kelly.
What did Kelly
argue?
Kelly said that Thompson said during
the loan application that the loan was a done
deal and that he relied upon this
false statement to his determent.
What is the law on agency?
Apparent authority is based upon estoppel,
arising from the principal knowingly
permitting an agent to hold himself out as
having authority to act on the principal's
behalf.
Thompson did locate the mortgage company and brought the parties together. However, there is no evidence that he had
any role in the negotiations. Instead, he merely acted as a middleman. There
was also no evidence shown that Thompson had apparent authority
to commit the funds or to obligate the bank.