Contracts Final

Bob promises Maggie, to pay Maggie $500, in exchange for Tony's promise to Bob, to give Bob a lunchbox once owned by the legendary Bruce Lee. Are the promises valid consideration.

yes

Impied-in-fact contracts

"True" contracts When a person requests another to perform services for him or to transfer property to him, the law will infer a bargain to pay Based on a tacit, unspoken promise; inferred from actions, not words Arises from the interaction of the parties The enforceability of an Implied-in-fact contract turns on the request (implied promise) rather than whether the defendant received something of value or benefit. It can be enforced even if a D received nothing of value.

termination of the POA

1) rejection or counteroffer 2) lapse of time 3) revocation 4) death or incapacity of the offeror or offeree

Mona is seriously hurt when a bank robber storms out of a bank and shoots her as she is waiting for a bus. Hysterical with pain, Mona fights off rescuers and paramedics and refuses to permit anyone to touch him. Over her protests, Dr. Spock, a surgeon, renders first aid in stops hemorrhaging, saving Mona's life. Dr. Spoke sends Mona a bill for $900, the reasonable value of his services. Most other physicians would have charged no more than $800 for the same care. A. Mona must pay $900 if it is reasonable. B. Mona does not have to pay more than $800. C. Mona is not obligated to pay Dr. Spock. D. Mona has no duty to pay Dr. Spock because she rejected his services before they were tendered. E. There is an implied in fact contract between Mona and Spock.

A

On March 5th, Michael offers to sell his Michigan Ave. office building to Maggie for $3 million and states, "Send your office clerk to my chambers with a written response by 10.a.m., March 7th." On March 7th, @ 9:55am, Maggie shows up herself at Michael's chambers with an acceptance letter. Which is most accurate? A.There is a contract. B.There is no contract because Maggie violated the mirror image rule. C.There is a contract if Maggie has $3 million. D.There is not a contract because Maggie didn't have an option contract.

A

The Chicago Bears football team offers to employ Heisman Trophy winner, Benny "the Jet" Williams, at an annual salary of $900,000, "for so long as Benny Williams is reasonably capable of performing his job responsibilities and does perform his duties." Benny accepts the offer. Which answer is most accurate? The agreement is enforceable because it contains sufficiently definite terms. The agreement is unenforceable because it is not reasonably certainty regarding all key terms. The agreement is enforceable because it calls for unilateral performance. The agreement is enforceable if Benny read the agreement before signing

A

Maggie's 15 years old water heater explodes and is destroyed. Maggie purchases a water heater with a market value of $650.00 from Sears for $700. Included in the price is installation of the water heater at Maggie's house by a specialized technician, which normally takes about two hours. •A. The UCC governs this transaction. •B. The UCC does not apply because it involves services by a specialized professional. •C. The UCC governs despite it being it being primarily services contract. •D. The UCC does not apply because it involves goods and services.

A - The technician brings the good, and the primary purpose is the acquisition of the good C- Wrong because if it was primarily for services the UCC does not apply

Aaron, a first-year associate, invites his colleague, Lisa, to a dinner party he's having at his home for other first-year associates from his law firm. To look impressive, Lisa purchases a dress, new shoes, earrings, and a purse, totaling $1800, to wear to the dinner party. The purchased items are non-refundable. After inviting Lisa, Aaron discovers none of the other four associates like Lisa. They claim she makes them uncomfortable. Lisa's socio-economic upbringing is completely different from other associates. Aaron cancels Lisa's invitation, explaining to Lisa that he doesn't want to "make other associates feel uncomfortable." Lisa demands Aaron pay her the $1800 she spent on her outfit, and drops off all the items she purchased at Aaron's doorstep, as she no longer has any use for them. David refuses to pay Lisa any money, but sends her an "apology" via text message. Lisa sues Aaron and wants the reasonable value of the items she purchased for his dinner party under contract implied in law and contract implied in fact. Please explain how a court should rule.

Aaron prevails - she acted officiously; thrust goods/services upon you w/o indication

Sara offers to sell Drake her house for $50K, stating that the offer will remain open for 30 days. Drake replies, "Won't you take less than $50K?" Sara replies, "No." Drake writes within the 30-day period, "I accept your offer for $50K. Which is most accurate? A. There is a contract between Sarah and Drake. B. There is no contract because Drake rejected the offer. C. There is a contract because Sara didn't attempt to sell the house to another person. D. There is a contract between Sara and Drake for $50K.

D

Brenda knows that noted actor, Al B., did not assault or hit her. Nonetheless, she tells Al that she plans to file suit against Al for intentionally striking her in the head with an umbrella unless he pays her $100K. Al, despite knowing he had no intent to hit Brenda, and never struck her, doesn't want to be fired from his movie job or face bad publicity for having being accused of striking Brenda. So he agrees to settle the case for $100K in exchange for Brenda promising to forbear from suing him for assault and battery or any other claim of striking her. Both sign the settlement agreement. After losing his job for unrelated reasons, Al refuses to pay Brenda the $100K. She sues AL for breach of K. Is the settlement agreement enforceable?

Answer: No She's not giving up sth for which she has legal right to do

Momo knows Ralph cannot afford to buy his son a bike for his birthday and offers to loan Ralph $300. Ralph tells Momo, "I accept your offer." The next day, Momo gives Ralph a $300 and tells Ralph he expects to receive payment of $325 in 30 days. Ralph, in response, promises to pay $325 within 30 days. Does their loan agreement have valid consideration?

Answer: YES Momo: no obligation right to loan but did Ralph: gives additional 25 dollars so yes consideration

The Apple Corporation has employed Sony for 20 years. One day, a company employee, informed Sony that the company will pay him a pension of $600 per month when he retires for the rest of his life. Tony, the CEO's son, then congratulated Sony and said, "Now you can go buy a boat." In reliance on Tony's statement, and now, no longer worried about income because of the promised pension, Sony retires the next month, doesn't work anywhere else. When Apple refuses to send Sony a check, he sues on grounds of promissory estoppel. Sony had recorded the "boat" statement from Tony, as proof that his co-worker made a promise of a pension, which is legal in their city. Who prevails?

Apple "Now you can go buy a boat" à not a promise

Momo publishes an offer for a $100,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person who entered a specific federal building, illegally, and stole highly secretive US government classified information and sold it to a foreign country. Avon, intending to obtain the reward, gives the requested information to Momo a year after the publication of the reward offer. The offender is convicted. When Avon attempts to collect the reward, Momo notifies Avon that the reward needs to be accepted within a reasonable time and therefore, the power of acceptance has expired. B/c the reward made no mention of the time required to accept, Avon sues Momo for the $100,000.

Avon prevails

Bank of America publishes a $100K offer of reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person responsible for bombing one of its banks and injuring a bank security guard in the process. Tim Soprano, intending to obtain the reward, gives BoA the information regarding the whereabouts of the offender nearly an entire year after the statute of limitation has run on bank bombing criminal charge. The offender is convicted 7 days later on a lesser unrelated criminal charge. Which is most accurate? A.A. Tony is entitled to the reward of $100K because he timely accepted the reward. B.B. Tony isn't entitled to the reward because an offer is only valid for a reasonable time. C.C. Tony is not entitled to $100K unless BoA specifically said the reward was guaranteed regardless of performance. D.D. Tony is not entitled to the reward because he never informed BoA he was intending to accept the reward by finding the offender.

B

Bob and Marge are having an extra-marital affair. Bob is an company executive and Marge is an employee of the same company. Marge knows that Bob is married, but believes wants Bob to leave his wife. After Bob tells Marge he will not leave his wife, Marge threatens to sue Bob for harassment, although she knows that such a claim would be false. Not wanting their extramarital affair to be publicized, Bob offers to pay Marge $10K in exchange for her forbearing from filing the sexual harassment claim. Which answer is most accurate regarding their agreement? •A. Marge's forbearance to file the claim is valid consideration. •B. Marge's forbearance to file the claim is not valid consideration because Marge did not give up a legal right. •C. Marge's forbearance to assert the claim is not valid consideration because she has a legal duty to report Bob's infidelity to authorities. •D. Marge is entitled to the $10K because her and Bob had a special relationship.

B

Dibo offers to make repairs to Marlo's rental building in return for Marlo's promise to pay Dibo $10,000 when the repairs are complete. Marlo replies by advising Dibo that he will pay Dibo $9,000 to make all necessary repairs to the building. Days later, Dibo begins making repairs in the rental building. Marlo is aware of Dibo's performance and does not interfere. After 50% of the repair work is complete, Marlo advises Dibo to stop the repair work and to leave the property. When Dibo ask for payment, Marlo advises Dibo that he did not accept his offer and therefore, Marlo is not obligated to pay Dibo because there is no contract. Dibo sues Marlo. Which answer is most accurate? A. Dibo is entitled to $9,000 because Dibo accepted the offer. B. Marlo cannot revoke the offer because of the doctrine of substantial performance. C. Dibo is entitled to $4,500 because Dibo accepted Marlo's offer. D. Marlo can order Dibo off his property and halt performance because the two were involved in preliminary negotiations and had not yet reached a final agreement.

B

In a dangerous flood, Dan's car is floating away into a dam. Steve, while flying by in a helicopter, lands and chains Dan's car to a thick tree to keeps it from floating into the dam and wrecking. As Dan observes from his home. Dan gives Steve a thumbs up as he get's back into his helicopter and flies away. Dan retrieves his car after the flood, which has sustained no damage. Unbeknown to Dan, Steve was not a good Samaritan, but a professional vehicle rescuer, and sent Dan a bill for $750. Dan is furious. A.There is an implied in law contract with Steve. B.There is an implied in fact contract with Steve. C.Dan does not have to pay Steve because Steve volunteered to help. D.Dan is only obligated to pay if his vehicle is worth $750 or more.

B

Maggie mails Momo an offer to sell Momo her Porsche car Momo for $37K via mail. Upon receipt on May 6th, Momo mails an acceptance via U.S. mail. On May 7th, Momo learns that his son was accepted into Columbia University and must pay $20,000 to reserve his seat. Shocked by the news, Momo decides he cannot afford to buy a Porsche and send his son to Columbia University. He contacts Tim, his cousin, a U.S. mail clerk, and tells him to retrieve Momo's acceptance letter from the yesterday's Post Office mail pick up, which Tim does before delivery to Maggie. a. There is no acceptance. b. Momo's acceptance is valid. c. There is no acceptance because Momo effectively retracted the acceptance. d. No contract because it is impossible for Maggie to ever receive an acceptance after Tim removed the letter from Post Office circulation.

B

Momo borrows $200 from Al so that Momo can file a small claim against Rhonda and recover $7,000 in proceeds that Rhonda owes Momo. In exchange for the loan, Momo promises Al, $6,000, after he wins his small claim and recovers $7,000. Which is most accurate? •A. The promise to give $6K lacks consideration. •B. The promise is supported by consideration. •C. The promise to pay $6K in exchange for a $200 loan is illegal and unenforceable. •D. The promise to pay $6K is valid only if Momo actually used the money for its intended purpose.

B there is a consideration because neither of them were legally obligated to make the promises they did

Ralph offers to sell 500 hammers to Mike via letter with specified terms. Mike replies, "I accept your offer. Please ship the hammers in accordance with your offer letter. Also, please send me 100 type A nails at you listed price." Ralph timely receives Mike's letter. Which answer is most accurate? There is not a contract because Ralph never shipped the merchandise. There is a contract because Mike accepted Ralph's offer. There is no contract because Mike terminated the power of acceptance by making a counteroffer. There is not a contract because Mike's acceptance did not comply with the Mirror Image rule. C & D.

B Mike just adds another offer on top of his acceptance of the first one Counteroffer Rule: Did he make his acceptance conditional upon recieving the nails at the price? No; merley an acceptance with an additional term (only conditional if Mike were to say I accept your offer IF you ship me 100 nail)

Momo sends Mona an offer on May 1: I hereby offer to sell you my house for $250,000." Mona replies on May 3: 'Send me your lowest price." Momo receives Mona's reply on May 5 and send Bill the same offer he sent Mona. On May 7, Mona mails Momo an acceptance letter. Momo receives Mona's letter on May 8. On May , Bill replies to Momo: "I accept your offer but I hereby reserve my the right to cancel the purchase." A.Momo has a K with Bill. B.Momo has a K with Mona. C.Momo does not have a contract with Mona or Bill because they both rejected his offer. D.Momo does not have a contract with Mona because Momo revoked the offer.

B Statement "send me your lowest price" is not rejection

Aaron walks into a barbershop and watches patrons receive hair cuts. Above each barber chair is a sign that says, "haircuts $10.00." Aaron thinks $10 is entirely too much money but sits in a barber chair anyway. The barber cuts Aaron's hair and trims his mustache. Afterwards, Aaron looks in the mirror and says, "I think this is worth $7 and hands the barber that amount. The barber demands $10. A.Aaron should pay $7. B.Aaron should pay $10, the usual rate if it's reasonable. C.Aaron should pay $10 the usual rate because he assented to pay it. D.Aaron does not have to pay any money.

C

Harry notices Sara and Lisa, two sisters, walking into a store. Lisa owes Harry $300. When Harry approaches the sisters and politely inquires about when he could expect to receive the $300 that Lisa promised to pay him weeks ago, Lisa screams, falls to the floor, and starts to cry, yelling, "How could you?!" The security officer tackles Harry and the sisters run away. Harry is arrested and charged with assaulting Lisa, but Harry is released on bail until his trial. Harry contacts Sara and promises to pay Sara $10,000 if she will tell the truth about what happened in the store when she takes the witness stand. Sara agrees if Harry will pay in cash the day after she takes the stand. Harry agrees. During trial, Sara tells the truth. Harry is found innocent, however, largely because video footage inside the store reveals that he did not commit a crime. Upon his release, Harry refuses to pay Sara. A.Harry is bound despite it being the video footage that proved his innocence. B.Harry is bound because he received a material benefit. C.Harry is not bound. D.Harry is not bound unless Sara relies on promissory estoppel. E.A & B.

C

Jane, an unmarried woman, is pregnant with the child of General Brandon C. Jones, a U.S. Army Brigade Commander, and adviser to the Secretary of Defense. Both are single. In exchange for Jane naming the child, "Brandon C. Jones II," General Jones offers to provide monthly support and education for the child in the amount of $3K until the child reaches age 22, and set up a college trust fund that will cover 5 years of college education for the child, up to $150K. Jane happily agrees to the deal and names the child accordingly. Which answer is most accurate regarding whether the agreement lacked consideration? •A. Yes, because Jane did not suffer a detriment. •B. Yes, because the child may not want to be named, "Brandon C. Jones II." •C. No, because parties are not required to exchange performance of equivalent value. •D. No, because General Jones is a highly respected person and the child would benefit from having his name.

C

Sara offers, via mail, to sell Lisa her car for $20K and ask Lisa to accept before May 25. Lisa receives the offer and immediately mails a rejection on May 1. Lisa changes her mind a day later and mails Sara an acceptance on May 2nd. Which is most accurate? •A. There is a contract, eff. May 2, because of the Mailbox rule. •B. There is no contract b/c Lisa mailed the rejection first. •C. There is a contract only if Sara receives the acceptance before the rejection. •D. There is not a contract because Lisa mailed a rejection and an acceptance.

C

Sara offers, via mail, to sell Lisa her car for $20,000 and tells Lisa, "Let me know if you accept the offer in a few days but not later than May 5." Lisa receives the offer and immediately mails an acceptance on May 2. Lisa changes her mind a day later and mails Sara a rejection on May 3. Which is most accurate? ​ A. There is a contract, effective May 2. ​ B. There is no contract because Lisa mailed a rejection on May 3. ​ C. There is a contract only if Sara receives the acceptance before May 5. ​ D. There is not a contract unless the acceptance arrives before May 5 before the rejection.

D

On Sept 1 Cornel Best sends Paul Robeson an offer to sell Paul a 2020 Range Rover Velar for $51000 and says he will give him until Sep 6 to decide. Cornell knows that the car is worth $61000 but does not want to charge Paul the market price because he wants Paul to make at least $10,000 profit in the event Paul sells the car. On Sep 3, Paul advises Cornel that he will take the offer under advisement but really does not think he needs another car and certainly does not want to spend $51,000. Cornell owes Malcolm $41000. When Malcolm learns of Cornel's offer to Paul, on Sep 4, Malcolm tells Cornel that he will buy the RR Velar if Cornel will credit him the $41,000 he owes plus (Malcom gives) an additional $11,000 (to Cornel) for a total of $52,000. Not wanting to upset Malcolm, Cornel accepts Malcolm's offer. When Paul notices Malcolm driving the Velar on Sep 5, Malcolm tells Paul that he just bought the car from Cornell. On Sep 6, Paul delivers $51,000 to Cornel as payment for the Velar. Cornell refuses payment and Paul sues Cornel for breach of contract and sues Malcolm for possession of the car. Cornel then files a claim for return of the car from Malcolm on grounds that his deal with Malcolm lacked consideration. The judge has asked you to make a recommendation regarding the legal issues.

Cornel is already legally obligated to 41000 so 41000은 does not count as consideration 따라서 Malcolm이 11000로 51000 차를 삼 (근데 malcolm산 가격 + 빌려준돈 가격 하면 차 값 52000으로 total)

On May 1, Sara offers to sell Drake her house for $50K, stating that the offer will remain open for 21 days. On May 3, Drake replies, "I will pay $48K for the house today. But I'll need time to consider $50K. It seems a little high." After Sara declines to sell for $48K. On May 7th, Drake writes, "I accept your offer for $50K. Which is most accurate? A. There is a contract between Sarah and Drake if Sara accepts $50K. B. There is no contract because Drake rejected the offer. C. There is a contract because Sara gave Drake an option contract for 21 days. D. There is a contract for $50K.

D

Ralph sends an offer to Momo stating, "I hereby offer to sell you my autographed skateboard for $700 with payment to be received not later than 4pm, September 1st. My business address is 300 S. Jackson Avenue. Do you accept?" Momo, who has known Ralph for years, and eaten dinner at his home on previous occasions, promptly sends an acceptance letter to Ralph's home address, which Ralph receives two days later on August 27th. Which answer is most accurate? There is not a contract because Ralph never made an offer. There is not a contract because Momo did not properly accept the offer. There is a contract if Ralph receives timely payment. There is a contract between Ralph and Momo.

D

Anthony makes a written offer to Betsy to sell Betsy his "Kalahari" ranch for $725,000. The offer states that the offer, "will remain open for 30 days and is not subject to revocation." Two days later, while Betsy is considering Anthony's offer, Anthony notifies Betsy that the offer is terminated. Betsy sues Anthony for the right to purchase the "Kalahari" ranch. Which answer is most accurate regarding who prevails in court? Betsy, because she had a legal right to purchase the ranch for 30 days and her time had not yet expired. Anthony, because an offer can be revoked any time prior to acceptance regardless of the circumstances. Betsy, because $725,000 is a significant amount of money and she was within her rights to take reasonable time to consider the offer very carefully. Anthony, because his offer to sell was revocable despite him stating the opposite.

D B is incorrect due to the language; an offer can be estopped from recvokation

Abdul and Benito agree that Benito will purchase Abdul's "Sultan" ranch for $250,000, consisting of $150,000 cash down payment and a $100,000 mortgage. Abdul agrees to obtain the mortgage loan for Benito, or, if unable to do so, Abdul will loan Benito the $100,000. The terms of the loan are not stated in their agreement, but the agreement contains a provision stating that "this agreement is binding." Which answer is most accurate regarding the validity of their agreement? The agreement is not valid because the two are reasonably certain about the price of the ranch. The agreement is valid if Abdul offers Benito a mortgage loan that is reasonable. The agreement is valid if Abdul informs Benito of the loan details within 30 days after their agreement. The agreement is not valid for lack of specificity.

D Contract is too indefinite because it does not specify the terms of the loan

Maggie offers to sell Mike her 2010 Honda Accord for $5000. She knows her car is worth $6000 and that Mike is desperately in need of a car after having crashed his car the night before. Reasonably believing that Maggie is making a serious offer, Mike immediately accepts Maggie's "offer" and tells her he will deliver the money to her the next morning and pick up the keys at 10am. Maggie responds, "Great!" Mike leaves the room to go tell his brother he just bought a car. Maggie, however, is only playing a joke on Mike, and has no serious intent to sell Mike her car. When Mikes shows up with money to pick up the keys, Maggie says, "I was just playing" and slams the door in his face. Mike sues Maggie for breach of contract. Who prevails?

Mike

Amy is sitting at a bar and notices her co-worker, Bob, in a nearby seat. Like some of her colleagues, Amy doesn't like Bob because she perceives him to be a poor employee. She decides to play a trick on Bob so she can make her colleagues laugh. She approaches and tells Bob that she is waiting to meet someone she met online who promised to purchase her 2019 BMW for $15K. She knows Bob badly needs a car and that her BMW is worth $30K. With a serious look on her face, Amy explains that she is selling the BMW at half price because she wants a quick sale to purchase a new but limited Lexus. Excited by Amy's apparent desire to sell her BMW, Bob offers to purchase the BMW for $15,000 in cash. Amy "agrees" to deliver the BMW to Bob the next day at work if Bob brings the cash to work. They sign a napkin memorializing their "contract." When Bob shows up at work and hands Amy the $15,000 cash, Amy laughs throws it on the floor and says, "You are such a fool. I wouldn't sell you my BMW! I was joking!" The office employees laughs at Bob. Outraged by Amy's conduct, Bob sues Amy for breach of contract. How should a court rule?

It is a contract - joking: her subjective intent - objective: reasonable person

Arturo desires to make a binding promise to give $1,000 to his adult son, Gotti. After being advised that a gratuitous gift of $1,000 is not contractually binding, Arturo offers to buy from Gotti for $1,000, a book entitled, "Kata," which is worth less than $1. Gotti accepts Arturo's offer knowing that the purchase of the book is a mere pretense. Is there an enforceable contract between Arturo and Gotti? Explain.

No, Unenforceable b/c 1 dollar is not enough (it's nominal)

•Lisa Tower, a world class scientist, suddenly dies in a car crash. At the time of her untimely death, she owed her sister, Latifa, $75,000, stemming from a loan Latifa granted Lisa. Knowing of Lisa's loan and debt to Latifa, Major Dickerson, Lisa's widower husband promises Latifa that he will pay the $75,000 debt. He, however, never tenders payment and Latifa sues seeking promissory restitution. Explain who is likely to prevail in court?

Major only had a moral obligation, there is not legal consideration Major did not receive material benefit from the loan

Brad and Sally Williams received a letter from Mase Bank ("Mase"), their mortgage company. Mase demanded the Williams renew the expired fire insurance on their mortgaged property as they agreed to do pursuant to the terms of the mortgage agreement. Brad and Sally choose to spend their money on other matters. Mase mails Brad and Sally another letter stating if they do not obtain insurance coverage on the mortgaged property within 45 days, Mase will obtain fire insurance on the mortgaged property and charge Brad and Sally for the insurance cost. Brad and Sally figure that Mase will obtain a better deal on fire insurance than they could if they purchased it, and therefore, take no action in response to Mase's second letter. Three weeks after receiving the Mase second letter, the mortgaged property burns down, but the mortgaged property isn't covered by fire insurance, resulting in $600K in property losses. Mase never attempted to purchase fire insurance. Brad and Sally sue Mase for $600K, alleging that Mase was obligated to obtain the fire insurance b/c of promissory estoppel. Mase claims it is not liable at all, and if it is liable, damages are limited to the cost of fire insurance for $4,000. Who prevails?

Mase prevails - The promise is to get insurance after 45 days -3 weeks after receiving 2nd letter, the property burned down à Can't be reliance -They only promised after 45 days

Momo leases 10 acres of land from John, owner of the Four Sevens Ranch in Texas. One day, John gives Momo an exclusive option to purchase the 10 acres he leases for 1 year for $25K, to expire on January 7, 2022. Momo thanks John for the "option to purchase." Three months after receiving the "option" from John, Momo builds a farm house on the land, installs a drainage system and plows the land for seeding, with John's permission. After 11 months, John receives an offer from Abbott for $35K for the 10 acres that Momo leases from John, and, thereafter, notifies Momo on or about December 8th that the option to buy the land is revoked. After receiving the notice of revocation, Momo sends John $25K on Dec. 9th, which John refuses to accept. Momo sues to enforce his "legal right to purchase" the 25 acres. John contends Momo has no such right because the offer was revoked? Who prevails?

Momo?

In the State of Transylvania, contracts between spouses are enforceable and spouses are under a duty not to leave a spouse without "just cause." An extramarital affair is not considered "just cause." Lisa, Anthony's wife, leaves him without "just cause," intending never to return. Depressed over his wife's departure, Anthony promises to pay Lisa $250,000, half the investment value he accumulated as separate property prior to their marriage, if she will return home. Feeling that $250K is worth returning to Anthony, Lisa returns home. When Anthony refuses to pay Lisa the $250K after she returns, Lisa sues. Should the court enforce the agreement?

NO Lisa was legally obligated to stay without just cause so there is no consideration because she did not do something that she was legally obligated to do

Al offers to sell Sally Jones, his autographed copy of "The Autobiography of Joe Jones" for merely $5, and states, that "no other acceptance will be honored but the mailing of Sally's personal check for exactly $5." Incredibly moved by Al's gesture, Sally sends a personal check of $10 to Al, intending to show her immense gratitude. Contract?

No

Bank of America offers a $100,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of the person who burglarized their Michigan Avenue bank. Chicago police detective Sandra discovers that Momo is a friend of the burglar and takes Momo to the infamous Homan Square police unit for intense interrogation. Det. Sandra threatens Momo with arrest and prosecution if Momo does not give up information leading to the arrest of the burglar. Momo knows of the reward and of the enormous pressure put on police and prosecutors to find the burglar. Momo provides information that leads to the arrest of Shirley Temple, the burglar. After his release, Momo attempts to collect the reward. Is Momo entitled to payment?

No

John is in possession of a pistol that was once owned by legendary Delta Force operator, Col. Beckwith. John offers to sell the pistol to Mark for $32,000 and promises to keep the offer open for 21 days so long as Mark pays John $150. Mark pays John $150. Ten days later, John receives an offer from Fred for $48,000 for the pistol if they can close the deal within 3 days. John tells Fred that he will consider his offer and notifies Mark that he (John) is considering selling the pistol to Fred within the next 3 days." Has John revoked his offer to Mark? May John sell the pistol to Fred? Why?

No

Lisa publishes the following offer: I will pay $250 for the return of my iWatch lost during the Air & Water show on Oak Street beach yesterday. Susan sees the offer and immediately responds to Lisa, I accept your offer and will search for your iWatch immediately. Contract?

No

Chris writes Momo via SMS, "I am desperate to sell my bike for $300. Would you consider purchasing it"? Momo replies: "Yes."

No - it's invitation b/c of the word "consider"

John: "I'm glad you're back in town. I missed you. Will you join me for dinner tonight at my home?" Betsy: "I missed you too. I accept"

No contract - social engagement rule

Chris writes Sal via SMS, "I am desperate to sell my house before the trial starts. I would consider $300,000 for it." Sal prompts texts back, "Great. I will buy your house for $300,000." Is there a contract or must Chris first notify Sal that she, "accepts"?

No contract - this is a preliminary negotiation; the word 'consider' is not contractually bound

After seeing footage of homeless children sleeping on the streets in Serbia, Mona calls the American Red Cross and pledges $1,000 in 30 days. Michael, an American Red Cross executive, receives and records Mona's pledge, but takes no action in response to Mona's pledge. After 33 days, Mona hasn't tendered payment despite receiving inquiries on Day 31 and Day 32. The Red Cross sues Mona on Day 35 on grounds that her promise was legally binding. Mona argues that it was not binding and that promissory estoppel does not apply. Who prevails?

No detrimental reliance but American Red Cross still prevails -One exception of promissory estoppel is charitable organization -Charitable organization does not need to prove detrimental reliance at all

The Brown family hires Albert Shapiro, a famous artist, to paint a family portrait of them and deliver a 5ft x 7ft painting to their mansion in 30 days, so that it can be on display when VIPs arrive from Paris. Does the UCC apply?

No the UCC does not apply because the payment is predominately for the service of the painting

Steve sends Bill an offer of sale for his 2012 Range Rover for $40K. Steve knows that Bill desperately needs loves his car and figured it would be a great surprise. Excited by the offer he received from Steve, and wanting to act fast, Bill responds, "I accept your offer! But this acceptance is not effective unless you send me your acknowledgment of this acceptance no later than tomorrow, so I can make arrangements to give you the $40K without delay."

No, because the purported acceptance adds qualifications to the acceptance which terminates the power of acceptance in the original offeree and gives it to the original offeror. the additional stipulations creates a conditional offer (counter-offer)

Momo promises to deliver Maggie's furniture to her new home within 6-hours after pick up in exchange for $900. After Momo picks up Maggie's furniture, he stops by a restaurant and eats a bison burger. Feeling sleepy after eating, Momo stops by his apt. and to take a nap knowing that if he takes a nap, he will miss the 6-hour deadline. Momo decides he would prefer to take a nap and deliver Maggie's furniture the next day. With one hour to go before 6-hour deadline, Maggie calls Momo and offers to pay him an additional $100 if he delivers the furniture within the 6-hour time frame. Feeling lazy, Momo refuses to deliver the furniture before the next morning and hangs up. Maggie then calls back and offers Momo an additional $300 if he will deliver furniture at least 30 minutes before the 6-hours expires. Momo agrees and delivers the furniture 5.25 hours after picking it up. Maggie refuses to pay the $300. Momo sues Maggie for breach. Who prevails?

Prevails Momo Momo already had legal obligation to deliever the furniture within 6 hrs Maggie calls and says to deliever earlier, at this point, he is never obligated -6hrs is the time range -When she changes the time frame, the preexisting duty rule, no longer applies -Thus, Separate consideration

Coach Jones has led his football team to 8 NFL Super Bowl championship games. Fans rave about his famous "Wu Tang" defense and his QB. One day Coach Jones returns to his Oak Park, IL home and finds that his secret 'Wu Tang" notebook has been stolen. Coach Jones offers a $100,000 reward to any person that brings the notebook to him. Theft Detective Lane, an Oak Park, IL police sergeant, learns of the reward and starts investigating the crime. His investigative efforts lead him to Stanley "Sticky Fingers" Stovo's home where he finds the "Wu Tang" notebook. Det. Lane returns the notebook to Coach and requests the $100,000. But Coach Jones refuses to pay and Det. Lane sues Coach Jones. How should court rule?

Prexisitng Duty Rule: If you are a state official and have a preexisting legal duty it is your job to perform that. In this case, it is the detectives job to find and return the notebook.

Zee agreed to type Jonah's Legal Writing thesis paper for $600 by 5pm, September 8th. A week before the paper is due, when it would be virtually impossible to find someone else to type it, Zee demands another $100 to finish the thesis paper, which Jonah reluctantly agrees to pay if Zee gives the paper by 10am on the September 8th. When Zee delivers the thesis paper, Jonah gives Zee $600 and refuses to tender the additional $100. Zee sues Jonah. Who should prevail?

Prexisting Duty Rule: If a party to a contract is under a pre-existing duty to perform, then no consideration is given for any modification of the contract and the modification is therefore voidable Jonah prevails

Ryan hires Charlie, a general contractor, to build a swimming pool in his home for $78,000. Charlie, contracts with Terry, a subcontractor, to install the lighting for $8,000 and contracts with Poca, to perform the cement work for $13,000. After the work is complete with Ryan's knowledge, Ryan, who has not had any dealings with Poca or Terry, pays Charlie $78,000. Charlie pays Poca $10,000 and pays Terry, $10,000, and then leaves the country and does not respond to inquiries from Poca or Terry. Ryan has no contact with Charlie and does not know how to contact Charlie, and refuses to take inquiries from Poca or Terry or pay them remaining balances for their work. Terry and Poca sue Ryan under Implied in Law Theory. Who is likely to prevail? Why?

Ryan prevails -If the owner has paid general contractor, and general contractor doesn't pay subcontract; it's not a just owner to repay the benefit to subcontractors -Because owner already has paid

Sharon is riding her bike and notices a 13-year old boy nearly drowning in a swimming pool. Sharon jumps off her bike and dives into the pool, injuring her leg in the process, but saving the boy's life. The boy's mother, April, runs out yelling for help and thanks Sharon. April promises to pay the medical bill for Sharon's lacerated leg up to $1,000. When Sharon sends the April a $433 medical bill, a reasonable amount for the medical services, April refuses to pay. Sharon sues for promissory restitution. Who likely prevails?

Sharon prevails The son is a minor, so there is a legal obligation on April April made the promise to pay

Brad and Sally Williams received a letter from Mase Bank ("Mase"), their mortgage company. Mase demanded that the Williams renew the fire insurance on their mortgaged property as they agreed to do pursuant to the terms of the mortgage agreement between Mase and the Williams. Because of the birth of unexpected twins, Brad and Sally are unable to make the fire insurance payments and have no way of obtaining funds to purchase fire insurance. Mase mails Brad and Sally another letter stating if they do not obtain insurance coverage on the mortgaged property within 30 days, Mase will obtain fire insurance on the mortgaged property and charge Brad and Sally for the cost. Brad and Sally take no action in response to Mase's second letter. Three months later, the mortgaged property burns down, but the mortgaged property isn't covered by fire insurance. It was only after the fire that the Williams learned that they were uninsured. Brad and Sally sue Mase alleging that Mase was obligated to obtain the fire insurance by virtue of Promissory Estoppel. Who Prevails?

The Bank prevails Because of the birth of unexpected twins, Brad and Sally are unable to make the fire insurance payments and have no way of obtaining funds to purchase fire insurance. -no way of obtaining funds to do it à meaning no reliance on the bank -No detriment reliance

Rome sends Maggie a letter stating, "I offer to sell you my BMW for $5K. This offer will remain open for 5 days." A day later, Maggie writes Rome back stating, "I just spent a lot of money on Kanye West tickets. So I reject your kind offer. I'll give it some more thought over the next 2-3 days." Rome receives the letter the following day. Does Maggie still have the power of acceptance?

Yes, - She is still int he five-day window

Justin Timberwolf decides to sell all of his property to his longtime assistant, Hitch Green. On December 1st, Timberwolf writes to Green the following offer: "I offer to sell you my entire Cachaca estate for $2.9 million. I know you and your wife are expecting and have much to discuss. So in exchange for $2,000, I will keep this offer open until December 15th." In response to Timberwolf's offer, on December 3rd, Hitch sends Timberwolf a money order for $2,000, stating: "Thanks, Justin. You have been like a father to me." On December 6th, Hitch sends Timberwolf a letter stating: "My wife and I have decided to purchase your Cachaca estate. We will pay you $2.8 million for it." Timberwolf receives Green's letter on December 8th. He, however, does not read the letter. When Hitch does not receive a response from Timberwolf, Hitch sends another letter on Dec. 12th stating, "We accept your offer to pay $2.9 million." Timberwolf receives the Dec. 12th letter on December 13th. Timberwolf reads both letters virtually at the same time. What is the legal relationship between Timberwolf and Green?

There IS a contract. If it's within the window, you can still come back and say acceptance even you did counter-offer

Sears Company offers Sally, a potential new Sears employee, a deal promising to pay Sally, a $100K salary "plus a fair share of the company's profits," if Sally does good work. If Sally accepts, is the agreement enforceable?

There is NO contract here-There is a lack of specificity-There is vagueness-These two factors together render the agreement unenforcable

John runs into a homeless man sitting on the street wearing a U.S. Marine jacket. Touched by the homeless man's service to his country and obvious post-traumatic stress symptoms, John tells the homeless man if he will go around the corner to John's clothing store, he can pick out a new winter coat for himself on John's tab. Harry goes around the corner in an effort to retrieve the coat and enters John's store. Is there valid consideration to support contractual obligation between John and the homeless man?

There is no valid consideration; this is a gift on Johns part. Is there inducement? John is not bargaining for anything, John is simply offering a gift

Rob leased land from Sarah for $5000 a month. One day, Rob hired Tim to build a swimming pool on the land for his kids for $10K. After Tim completed construction of the pool, which increased the value of the land, Rob lost his job and refused to pay. Noticing the nice pool, Sarah told Tim she would pay him the for such a high quality job. Tim sent Sarah an invoice for $10K, but she refused to pay. Tim sues Sarah. Explain how should court rule?

Tim prevails Direct benefit to Sara: the improvement in the land Sarah is bound after receiving the benefit

Isis, a wealthy woman, sees a military veteran on the street selling tacos during the winter. Isis tells the veteran that she will give him $300 to buy a winter coat so he can stay warm during the winter. The veteran goes into an adjacent clothing store and purchases a winter coat for $150. When he returns to his taco stand, Isis refuses to pay the veteran after she learns that the veteran is a Green Bay Packers fan. The veteran sues Isis under promissory estoppel for $300. Isis denies that her promise is enforceable, and claims that even if it is binding, she is obligated to pay only $150. Who prevails?

Veteran?

Steve and his wife, Stefana, are camping at Yellowstone when Stefana discovers pictures that prove Steve had been unfaithful, and immediately tells Steve she wants a divorce. 2 days later, Stefana files for divorce and request the judge order Steve to vacate the marital home. During the initial hearing, the judge orders Steve to vacate the marital home until the divorce proceedings are finalized and property distribution of the marital home is complete. Steve departs. Two days later, Steve offers to give all of his ownership interest in their marital home to Stefana, if Stefana will withdraw her standing request to the court that Steve vacate the marital home. Steve wants to move back in and remain present during the next 45 days before their son, Dimitri, leaves for Oxford University. Stefana agrees and the two sign a letter detailing such agreement. Valid consideration?

YES He gives up all of his ownership interest & She is standing request keep him out of the home, which has been granted - She is not obligated to withdraw her husband but she DID it

Roberto send Amir a letter stating, "I offer to sell you my BMY for $5K." Two days later, Amir write Rome back stating "I am keeping your offer under advisement, but if you wish to close the matter at once, I'll give your $4500 for it today" Roberto receives the letter the following day, but does not reply. Two days later, Amir writes Roberto, I accept your offer to sell for $5K. Contract?

Yes - it was inquiry

Alisa offers to purchase a textbook owned by Azurra for $300, in exchange for delivery of the textbook the next day. Alisa and Azurra know that the textbook is worth only $150, and readily available on a daily basis for $150, but that Alisa simply desires to give Azurra extra money to help with school expenses. Is the agreement an enforceable contract or invalid for lack of consideration? Explain.

Yes there is an agreement if the book was $1 or $2 there would not be consideration because Alisa would be giving a gift instead

Tom's Hardware store is having a "going out of business" sale. Tom writes to Bob, the owner of a hardware store, and offers to sell Bob his key making machine for $400, and promises to deliver it within 5 days if Bob accepts. Bob replies, "I accept your offer, Tom. Also, if you would, please deliver to me five of your No. 2 hammers at your listed price."

Yes. Separate Offer

For $250K, Alpo, Inc. contracts with Bob's Engineering & Construction (Bob's) to install plumbing in condos that Bob's is building for Costco Homes. Bob's goes bankrupt, cannot pay Alpo, and stops working on the project completely as it cannot pay its workers. Costco promises to pay Alpo $150K if Alpo completes the installation in accordance with the contract between Alpo and Bob's. Valid consideration between Costco and Alpo?

Yes?

implied-in-law contract

an obligation imposed by the law without regard to either party's expressions of assent either by words or acts are "not real contracts," and general rules of contracts do not apply to them

Completely in love, Aliya and Berik are engaged on May 5. In anticipation of the marriage, on June 5 the same year, Berik, and his father, Lieutenant Colonel Ramas, enter into a written agreement by which Colonel Ramas promises to leave Berik his legendary Zulut sword, worth $650,000, in his will. In reliance on receiving the Zulut sword some day, Berik and Aliya marry. After Col. Ramas passes away, he leaves the Zulut sword to Berik's younger brother, Meril. Berik sues his father's estate to retrieve the sword. Please explain how a court is likely to rule.

binding

Momo says to Maggie: "If you will wash the car parked in front my house this afternoon before 4pm, I will pay you $20." What must Maggie do if she wishes to accept Momo's offer?

can form the contract by verbal acceptance or by showing up and doing it

In an attempt to raise money to offset his son's college expenses, Harry offered via mail to sell Sally his book, From Slavery to Freedom, by John Hope Franklin, for $3,000. Harry advised Sally that he would keep the offer open until 3pm on September 12. Sally received the offer on September 3 and applied for a bank loan to buy the book. When Thomas Sowell, a noted economist, heard about the Harry offer to Sally, he immediately sent Harry an offer to purchase the book for $3500. After receiving the Sowell offer, Harry sent a notice of revocation to Sally on September 6 that she received on September 7. On the same day, Harry offered to sell Sowell the right to purchase the book for $4000. Harry and Sowell executed a written agreement stating in consideration of two dollars that Sowell has paid I hereby grant Sowell the option to purchase my book, From Slavery to Freedom, for $4,000 until 4pm, September 12. Harry and Sowell knew that Sowell did not pay Harry the two dollars but Harry assumed Sowell would tender the payment within 24 hours of their agreement. Sowell never paid the two dollars as consideration for the option. When Derrick Bell learns of the offer Harry made Sally, he sent Harry a letter stating, I heard that you are interested in selling your From Slavery to Freedom book. Would you be willing to consider two separate payments of $2500 for the book with payment due on September 12 and September 24? When Harry received Bell's letter, he wrote Sowell on September 10 and stated, "I just received a great offer from Derrick Bell. I am not certain I can sell you the book now. Derrick's offer is quite generous." Sowell receive Harry;s letter and mails $4,000 on September 11th, which Harry receives on September 12th. One day prior, on September 11, a bank approves a loan for Sally and Sally mails Harry a cashier's check for $3,000. Harry received Sally's check on September 12th. On September 13, Harry wrote Bell and advised, "I accept your offer. Please send the first payment asap. When Sowell and Sally learn of Harrys email to Bell, they each sue Harry for breach of contract. The judge has asked you to consider the legal issues and explain how the matter should be resolved.

despite nonpayment, it is affective - It was not a offer when Bell asked Harry that "would you consider"- it is an inquiry so Harry did not have a power to accept

On August 21, Momo sends an offer by US mail to Al wherein Momo offers to sell his boat to Al if Al accepts on or before Aug. 26. Al immediately sends a letter of rejection to Momo after receiving the offer on Aug. 23. On Aug. 24, Al changes his mind and mails an acceptance to Momo. Momo receives the rejection letter on Aug. 24, but receives the acceptance letter on Aug. 25

no contract - acceptance letter valid only received before rejection

Al tells Tony, "I've decided to sell my boat for about $20,000." Tony immediately says, "I accept."

no contract - no specificity by saying "for about"

Al writes a letter to Bo, stating, "I will sell you my bike for $100. Let me know within a few days if you accept." Al correctly endorses the letter, addresses, and stamps the envelope. Shortly afterwards, Al deposits the letter in the mail on Aug 1st. It is delivered to Bo, on Aug. 3rd. Bo mails an acceptance on Aug. 4th. Al receives the acceptance on Aug. 6th.

offer/ contract - the date a contract was formed: Aug 4th.

The definition of officious

offering unwanted advice or services, often in an overbearing way A person who confers a benefit on another without request or without a legal obligation

unjust enrichment

one shall not be permitted to unjustly enrich oneself at the expense of another or to receive property or benefits without making compensation for them

Steve has worked for the Philadelphia Eagles, a pro football team, for 18 years. Eagles President, Candace Buffalo, promises Steve that upon his retirement, she will pay him a pension of $700 per month, contingent upon him never working for another football team. Steve retires and doesn't attempt to find other work or accept a job offer from the Dallas Cowboys, a pro football team. Five years after receiving $700, the Eagles stop paying on grounds that the pension was merely gratuitous, lacked consideration, and thus, is unenforceable. Steve argues that the Eagles are bound because of Promissory estoppel. Judge Jones has asked you to exam the legal issues and explain the legal relationship between the Eagles and Steve.

the best argument is that there was a contract -One party did something they were not legally obligated to do, one party refrained from doing something they had the legal right to do-Promissory Estoppel ONLY gives damages for reliance