LAW 402A Contracts Exam Review

How many elements are in a contract?

3 elements

What is the big topic in Kirksey v. Kirksey?

Gratuity and Gratuitous Promises

What was the big topic in Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.?

Public Policy as a ground for non-enforcement

What was the big topic in ProCD v. Zeidenberg?

Rolling contracts

(True or false) Under the common law, a statement of acceptance is effective only if it is a mirror image of the offer and expresses unconditional assent to all of the terms and conditions imposed by the offeror.

True

What are the key facts from Hawkins v. Mcgee?

- McGee the defendant's doctor, repeatedly offered to do an experimental surgery on the plaintiff, Hawkins. The doctor said "I will guarantee to make the hand a hundred percent perfect hand or a hundred percent good hand" - Hawkins only agreed due to this guarantee however, the hand was not 100%

In Leftkowitz how is an offer defined?

"Where the offer is clear, definite, and explicit, leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract."

How does Lucy v. Zehmer define mutual assent?

"[W]e must look to the outward expression of a person as manifesting his intention rather than his secret and unexpressed intention. 'The law imputes to a person an intention corresponding to the reasonable meaning of his words and acts.'"

In Hamer v. Sidway how is consideration defined?

"a valuable consideration in the sense of the law that may consist either in some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party, or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given, suffered or undertaken by the other."

Company A was to deliver 100 widgets to Company B on January 1st at $100 per widget. On December 1, Company A advised Company B that it would not be able to deliver on January 1 as promised. Company B urged Company A to deliver on time. On January 1, the cost of the widgets increased from $100 to $125 per widget. On December 15, the cost per widget was $110 each. Assuming that a reasonable amount of time to await performance by Company A was two weeks, what is the proper measure of damages?

$1,000, the difference between the contract cost and the cost to cover on December 15.

Which of the following choices most accurately describes the amount of damages claimed by Plaintiffs in Peeveyhouse?

$25,000

Buyer and seller contract for the sale of 1000 barrels of oil at a price of $50per barrel, payment, and delivery in 90 days. On the payment/delivery date, oil is selling at $44 per barrel and the buyer refuses to go through with the transaction. How much can the injured party recover?

$6,000 in expectation damages because this rule limits sellers claims to the difference between the contract price $50 and the market value of the goods on the contract day $44.

What was the big topic in Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal and Mining Co.?

- Measuring Lost Expectancy - Cost of Performance v. Diminution of Value

What is duress?

- One party must commit a wrongful act. - That wrongful act must preclude the other party from exercising his or her free will.

On May 1, Owen Owner writes to Robert roofer: "the roof on my barn was damaged in last week's storm. If you will repair the roof by the end of the week I will pay you $2,000 (signed) Owen Owner"Upon receiving Owner's letter, Roofer begins to repair the roof. Which of the following statements is correct?

A binding contract has been formed.

When measuring lost expectancy and cost of performance v. diminution of value what do courts consider?

1. Amount of the disproportion. The less the disproportion, the more willing they are to award cost of completion. 2. The extent to which the contract is subjective and personal vs. commercial. If the person cares about the completion, as opposed to a business deal, they are more likely to award cost of completion. The willfulness of the breach. 3. The more willful the breach, the more likely to award cost of completion. 4. If the contract provision breached is merely incidental to the main purpose in view, then the court is likely to award diminution in value.

How to spot bargained for exchange?

- Process of bargaining that leads to a contract - Naturally present in most commercial transaction

What were the key facts in Hamer v. Sidway?

- Story Senior offered Story Junior $5,000 if he would stop drinking, smoking, and playing cards from age 18-21. He could legally do all the above because he was 18. - Story Junior fulfilled his promise - Mesne assignment = Story Juniors interest passed to Ms Hamer and she is suing Sidway the executor of Story Seniors will over breach of contract, because the executor refused to pay the $5,000.

What was the big topic in Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores, Inc.?

- The equitable remedy of Promissory Estoppel applying during the negotiation phase - "[o]rdinarily only the promisee and not third persons are entitled to enforce the remedy of promissory estoppel against the promisor. However, if the promisor actually foresees, or has reason to foresee, action by a third person in reliance on the promise, it may be quite unjust to refuse to perform the promise." - Damages are awarded only such as in the opinion of the court are necessary to prevent injustice.

What are the two types of duress?

1. Traditional Duress: threats of physical harm, violence, or false imprisonment precluding a party from exercising his/her free will 2. Economic Duress: threats of contract breach or demands for modifications (pre-existing duty rule): coercion and lack of reasonable alternatives, losses much greater than damages for breach, can't wait for the legal system

Jim contracts to make repairs to Luis's building in return for Luis's promise to pay $10,000 on completion of the work. After spending $8,000 on the job, Jim fails to complete the building because of insolvency. Luis has the work completed by another builder for $4,000, increasing the value of the building to him by a total of $9,000, but he loses $500 in rent because of the delay. Under the Restatement, Second, Contracts §374, what can Jim recover from Luis? A. Jim can recover $5,000 from Luis in restitution less $500 in damages for the loss caused by the breach, or $4,500. B. Jim can recover $8,000 from Luis in restitution less $500 in damages for the loss caused by the breach, or $7,500. C. Jim can recover $2,000 from Luis in restitution less $500 in damages for the loss caused by the breach, $1,500. D. Jim can recover $1,000 from Luis in restitution less $500 in damages for the loss caused by the breach, or $500.

A

Which of the following choices best explains the term "assumpsit" as used in Hawkins v. McGee? A) a common law form of legal action available to a plaintiff who claims that a contract has been breached B) a common law form of action used by a plaintiff seeking to require a third party to assume a debt C) a common law form of action requesting the court to employ a rebuttable presumption

A

What are the elements of promissory estoppel?

1. Promisor made a promise 2. The promisor should have reasonably expected that the promisee would rely on the promise 3. The promisee actually relied on the promise and engaged in an action/forbearance of a right to their detriment 4. Injustice would result if the promise is not enforced

What are the elements of unconscionability?

1. The parties possessed severely unequal bargaining power; 2. The dominant party unreasonably used its unequal bargaining power to obtain oppressive or manifestly unfair contract terms; 3. The adhering party had no reasonable alternative.

Contract is considered supported by legal value if:

1. The promisee suffers a legal detriment 2. The promisor receives a legal benefit.

What are the elements of the parol evidence rule?

1. Whatever's written is the FINAL, fully integrated contract 2. Terms must be clear and unambiguous

Two elements of consideration

1. something of legally sufficient value must be given in exchange for the promise 2. there must be a bargained-for exchange

According to the court in Ever-Tite Roofing, a "reasonable time" is defined as: A. A question of fact depending on the nature of the contract proposed. B. Two weeks time. C. The time it takes to acquire financing. D. The time it takes to travel from the plaintiff'splace of business to the customer's house

A

Which of the following choices best explains the term "estoppel"? A) A legal principle that bars a party from denying or alleging a certain fact owing to that party's previous conduct, allegation, or denial. B) A legal principal that stops a party from entering into a contract without consideration. C) A cause of action used in pleading a breach of contract at common law D) A cause of action that bars a party form claiming a gratuity as consideration for a contract.

A

The following text is taken from the opening paragraph of Hawkins v. McGee, the "case of the day" reading assignment: "Assumpsit against a surgeon for breach of an alleged warranty of the success of an operation. Trial by jury. Verdict for the plaintiff.Which of the following choices best explains the term "assumpsit," as used in Hawkins v. McGee?

A common laq form of legal action available to a plaintiff who claims that a contract has been breached.

Following the reasoning of Judge Easterbrook in ProCd v. Zeidenberg, which of the following business practices would not be upheld by the court?

A consumer opens a software package to find an insert saying "you must pay an extra $10.00 fee in order to receive the password for this software," with instructions for paying the fee on-line.

What is the Rule of Law in Ever-Tote Roofing Corp. V. Green?

A contract may be created by acceptance of the offer within a time frame specified by the offer or, if no time is specified, within a reasonable time.

Which of the following choices best explains the term "estoppel"?

A legal principle that bars a party from denying or alleging a certain fact owing to that party's previous conduct, allegation, or denial.

What is the Rule of Law in Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co

A nonbreaching party has a duty to minimize damages.

Define "In bargained for exchange"

A performance or return promise is bargained for if it is sought by the promiser in exchange for his promise and is given by the promisee in exchange for the promise

What is the Rule of Law in Kirksey v. Kirksey?

A promise to provide free land for a residence that is fulfilled for a finite amount of time and then revoked is gratuitous and thus unenforceable despite inducing the promisee to move residences in reliance on the promise.

What is the Rule of Law in Hammer v. Sidway?

A promise to refrain from doing an illegal act is not enforceable

What rule did the court follow in reaching its decision in Feinberg v. Pfeiffer Co.?

A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise.

What was the big topic in Ever-Tite Roofing Corp. v. Green?

Acceptance by performance

What was the big topic from Batsakis v. Demotsis?

Adequacy of Consideration

What is the Rule of Law in Batsakis v. Demotsis?

Although a valid contract requires all parties to provide consideration, mere inadequacy of consideration will not void a contract.

Which of the following choices best explains the terms "demurrer," "testator," and "executor" as used in Hamer v. Sidway?

An executor is appointed by a testator to carry out the terms of his or her will.

A "unilateral offer" is:

An offer which may be withdrawn without notice before acceptance by an offeree.

Anne enters into a contract to build a house for Bob. Before the house is built, Bob decided that he does not want it, and notifies Anne to that effect. What are Anne's rights?

Anne has the right to treat the contract as broken when she receives the notice, and sue for the recovery of any profits she would have realized upon performance, and for any other losses which may have resulted to her.

ProCD v. Zeidenberg

F: "D" bought software at a store then attemented to use the product commercially. I: Does the buyer have to comply with additional terms inside of shrinkwrap license because they entered the contract and are they enforceable. R: Vendor may invite acceptance by conduct and limited conduct. Buyers may preform proposed conduct for acceptance. A: Judge Easterbrook relied on the UCC "a contract may be made in any manner sufficient to show an agreement: C: Buyer accepted terms so therefore there is acceptance of the offer making it a binding contract.

Hamer v. Sidway

Facts: A man promised his nephew that if he stopped drinking, smoking, and gambling until he was 21 that he would pay him $5000. When the nephew completed this agreement the uncle told him that he would hold onto the money and let it collect interest. When the uncle died Sidway, the executor to the uncles estate woudl not pay the money to Hamer, who now own the claim to the money, under the fact that he did not have consideration. Issue: did the original agreement show any consideration. in a agreement one must give up something. Decision: the court ruled in favor of Hamer because the legal rights given up by the nephew are enough to satisfy consideration.

(True or Flase) Promissory estoppel is an equitable remedy if there are no exceptions to it

False

How do you think the court would have ruled in Lucy if Lucy, the buyer of Ferguson Farms, had known that Zehmer, the seller, was just kidding? a. Lucy would not be entitled to specific performance, only damages. b. Lucy would not be entitled to specific performance or damages. c. There would be no consideration for the contract, and so the court would reform it due to mutual mistake. d. Lucy would be entitled to specific performance.

B

What do you think Justice Cardozo means by his use of the term "sacred talisman" in the following sentence:"The law has outgrown its primitive stage of formalism when the precise word was the sovereign talisman, and every slip was fatal it takes a broader view to-day. A promise may be lacking, and yet the whole writing may be 'instinct with an obligation,' imperfectly expressed." A) Talismans were required at one time for a contract to be enforceable in a court B) Precise words are not required for a contract to be enforceable in modern courts C) A contract was once thought to be an object that possessed magical powers D) The consideration for a promise in the contract cannot be implied, but must be expressed.

B

What rule did the court follow in reaching its decision in Feinberg v. Pfeiffer Co.? A) Past services are not a valid consideration for a promise B) A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise C) The consideration sufficient to support a contract may be either a benefit to the promisor or a loss or detriment to the promisee D) A promise to make a gift is not binding unless supported by a legal consideration

B

(True or false) Under Hadley, contract damages must not be those that a reasonable person would foresee or those damages that would be foreseen by communication by the innocent party to the breaching party

False

A seller contracted to sell to the buyer 100 widgets to be delivered by March 1, at the cost of $100 per widget. Unbeknownst to the seller, the buyer planned to sell the widgets at the Home Show on March 2. The seller delivered the widgets on March 10 - too late for the buyer's purposes, because the Home Show was over. For this reason, the buyer refused delivery, but she estimates that she lost an estimated $500,000 in sales (based on figures from the pervious year's Home Show). The seller was able to return all of the widgets to his supplier. The buyer seeks legal counsel regarding her rights to collect her lost profits. What do you advise?

Because the buyer's damages were not foreseeable, she is unlikely to prevail in a lawsuit to recover the lost profits.

According to legal experts in contract law if I promise to give my daughter, Marley, a valuable painting in exchange for her promise to give me $1: A) The 1$ was enough to induce my promise as bargained for B) The "recital" of consideration or "nominal" consideration will make the promise enforceable C) The agreement will not be enforced absent some rationale to enforce the promise without consideration D) Courts never inquire into the adequacy or sufficiency of consideration

C

Define the term, "parol evidence": a. Evidence that a plaintiff was out on parol at the time the contract was fraudulently breached b. Evidence of a spoken contract that has not been reduced to writing c. Evidence of a prior or contemporaneous agreement introduced in court in order to modify, explain, or supplement the contract at issue. d. Evidence introduced to demonstrate the parties intended that a key term of the contract remain ambiguous for future interpretation by the court

C

On May 1, Owen Owner writes to Robert Roofer:"The roof on my barn was damaged in last week's storm. If you will repair the roof by the end of the week I will pay you $2000.(signed) "Owen Owner" Upon receiving Owner's letter, Roofer begins to repair the roof. Which of the following statements is correct? A. Owner's offer is irrevocable. B. Roofer may quit work anytime without liability. C. A binding contract has been formed. D. None of the above

C

The court in Henningsen rules that a person who, in the reasonable contemplation of the parties to the warranty, might be expected to become a user of the automobile, may bring suit against the manufacturer. Under this reasoning, who cannot bring suit on an implied warranty of merchantability claim? A. The purchaser of the car and purchaser's spouse. B. Members of the purchaser's family. C. Persons using the car without purchaser'sconsent. D. Persons occupying car with purchasers' consent.

C

Which of the following findings was least important in the court's deciding in favor of the Henningsens in Henningsen v. BloomfieldMotors, Inc.? A. In 1958, The "Big Three" (General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler) represented 93.5% of passenger car production. B. The insurance carrier's inspector and appraiser of damaged cars advanced the opinion that something went "wrong" with the steering wheel. C. There was no privity of contract between the Henningsens and Chrysler. D. The manufacturer only agreed to replace defective parts 90 days after the sale and only if the part is sent to the factory, transportation charges prepaid, and examination discloses toits satisfaction that the part is defective.

C

Your boss, a car dealer wants to publish the following ad on the company's website:"Year/Make/Model: 2007 Hando Concurrent Sedan EX V6 Vin#: 1294671254404, List price: $27,995, 2007 asking price: $25,525" He asks you, his legal expert if this ad is an offer or an invitation to make an offer. What is your opinion, based on Lefkowitz? a. Its a clear, definite, and explicit offer b. It is an offer because a performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested c. Its an invitation because no performance is promised in return for something requested d. It is an invitation because it leaves nothing open to negotiation.

C

What is the big topic in Raffles v. Wichelhaus?

Consensus ad idem (meaning of the minds/mutual assent)

What is Foreseeability of Damages?

Consequential or "special" damages are limited to reasonable foreseeable damages that arise from circumstances outside the contract.

What was the big topic in Hamer v. Sidway?

Consideration

In Expectation Damages what is the general rule?

Contracts are not usually enforced through physical compulsion, but rather, are enforced by allowing the injured party a dollar sum sufficient to put him in as good a position as he/she would have occupied had the contract been performed in full.

A "unilateral offer" is: a. An offer that cannot be withdrawn by the offeror before acceptance b. An offer that may only be withdrawn with notice to the offeree. c. An offer made to a specific person. d. An offer which may be withdrawn without notice before acceptance by an offeree.

D

According to legal experts in contract law, if I say to you: "if you go over to the bookstore there, you may purchase a sweatshirt on my credit": A)A contract is formed B) The short walk was requested as consideration for the promise C) The walk was requested as a gratuitous promise. D) It is often difficult to determine whether words of condition in a promise indicate a request for consideration or state a mere condition in a gratuitous promise

D

What statement below best states the issue addressed by the court in Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon? A) Did the plaintiff, Wood, breach the contract by accepting the grant of exclusive rights without consideration by the defendant, Lady Duff-Gordon? B) Was an exclusive agency created by the grant of exclusive rights without consideration by the defendant, Lady Duff-Gordon? C) Did the defendant, Lady Duff-Gordon, place her endorsement on fabrics, dresses and millinery without the plaintiffs knowledge, and withhold the profits? D) Was plaintiff Wood's promise illusory and therefore not supported by consideration, since it did not obligate him to take any positive action or do anything of an affirmative nature whatsoever?

D

What is the Rule of Law in Peevyhouse v. garland

Damages for breach of contract cannot be so excessive that they cause economic waste

What is promissory estoppel also known as?

Detrimental reliance

What is the Rule of Law in Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc,?

Disclaimers of implied warranties for the sale of goods and consequent limitations on liability are invalid if unfairly procured.

What was the big topic in Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc.?

Unilateral offers and advertisements

You have hired and paid a builder by contract to build you a one-story ranch house while you are gone for the summer. when you return, the builder has constructed a colonial two-story house. According to Britton v. Turner, what should you do if you are unhappy with the house and don't want to pay the builder any money for his work?

Do not move into the house and sue for breach.

What was the big topic from Hawkins v. Mcgee?

Expectation damages

Alaska Packers Association v. Domenico

F: After arriving in Alaska, the sailors stopped working and demanded $100 for the season in order to resume their work. Being unable to hire replacement sailors, an APA representative in Alaska signed a new contract agreeing to the higher pay. However, the APA representative told the sailors that he did not have the authority to alter their original contracts with APA. When the sailors returned to San Francisco, APA paid the sailors only their original contract price of $50 or $60. I: If parties enter a new agreement under which one party agrees to do no more than he was already obligated to do under an existing contract, is the new agreement enforceable? R: If parties enter a new agreement under which one party agrees to do no more than he was already obligated to do under an existing contract, the new agreement is unenforceable for lack of consideration. A: A party cannot benefit from his or her own bad faith by refusing to perform a contract in order to coerce another party relying on that performance into a new agreement that requires no additional performance in exchange for more beneficial terms. Therefore, a promise to pay a party to perform what he or she is already obligated to do is not enforceable. C: Court ruled in favor of APA based on the fact that you can not change a contract once it has been accepted.

Batsakis v. Demotis

F: Batsakis is suing Demotis over breach of contract to pay back the plaintiff 2000 + interest after he lent money to her. I: Whether an agreement between two parties where one party provides very minimal consideration relative to consideration provided by the other party constitutes a valid contract. R: Under contract law, a plea of want of consideration amounts to a contention that the instrument never became a valid contract. Although a valid contract requires all parties to provide consideration, mere inadequacy of consideration will not void a contract. A: The court relied on the fact that althoug small consideration, both parties provided consideration therefore making it a binding contract. C: The court enforces the rule that small consideration still upholds a contract.

Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.

F: Bought car in which contract included very little protection and the font was very small. Offerer did not mention that this was part of the contract. I: Were the defendants liable for a breach of contract on implied warranty of mechantability R: Chrystlers attempted disclaimer of an implied warranty of merchantability and of the obligations arising from it so Hostile to the public good it must be invalid. A: Elements of Unconscionablility ● Parties possessed severely unequal bargaining power ● The dominant party unreasonably used its bargaining power to obtain oppressive/manifestly unfair contract terms ● The adhering party had no reasonable alternative C: Public policy as grounds for non-enforcement of a contract operates as a defensive against enforcement even where the disadvantaged party was fully aware of the term in question and apparently asecnted to it with full knowledge of the consequences. COurts look at the contract term to determine if it meets the standard legally

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc.

F: Defendant advertised the sale of 3 fur coats for 1 dollar a piece. Ad stated first come first serve. Plaintif arrived at the store first but the Defendant refused to sell coats at the ad price, Stated that there were limitations that the purchaser had to be a woman. Happened again the next week as well I: Does the ad in a newspaper constitute an offer? R: Where an offer is clear, definite, and leaves nothing for negotiation, it constitutes as an offer, While offers can be modified, after an acceptance offer cannot be modified, Acceptance completes the offer. A: The test of whether a binging obligation may originate in ads addressed to the general public: ● Whether the facts show that some performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested. C: The contract rules on advertisements promote predictability, fairness, freedom of contract and efficiency by providing certainty for those involved in the exchanging of goods/services.

Wood v. Lucy Lady Duff-Gordon

F: Defendant is a designer who enter contract with "P" giving hi sole authority of the sale of her clothes. Profits would be split 50/50. Plaintiff said that "D" broke the contract by placing endorsements and taking all the profits without his knowledge. I: Does a contract lack mutuality because it does not explicitly state terms in the contract. Whether a promise to use reasonable efforts may be implied from the entire circumstances of the contract. R: A promise may be lacking and yet the while writing may be instinct with obligation imperfectly expressed. If so there is a contract. Mutuality may be implied from the circumstances surrounding the promise. A: The court relied the fact that it was clear both parties would provide reasobable efforts to generate income. C: The court enforces the rule of Illusory promises in the judgment of this case

Feinberg v. Pfeiffer

F: Feinberg is suing Pfeiffer over breach of contract to get amages after the defendant stoped making payments that were promised to the plaintiff. I: Was there a contract based on promissory estoppel? Whether a gratuitous (and thus unenforceable) promise is nevertheless made enforceable by the promisee's reasonable and detrimental reliance on the promise. R: A promise that induces an action or forbearance is binding if injustice can only be avoided by enforcement of the promise. A: The court relied on the fact that Mrs. Feinberg supported herself with the money she was promised monthly C: The court enforces the rule of promissory estoppel and ruled infavor of the plaintiff.

Hadley v. Baxendale

F: Hadley sent his servant to get a replacement part for the mill. The defendant stated that they will deliver the part to the mill on the following day. The part never arrived and therefore the mill was shut down. Hadley sued for breach of contract for the full amount of profits the mill would have received. I: The issue of this case was establishing the defendant's liability for the damages endured by Hadley consequently from Baxendale's failure to fulfill a promise R: The rule of law is where a contract which has been broken, the damages received should be considered arising naturally or have been in contemplation at the time of creation A: The court applied that since there was no communication that the part was a staple to the mill, the defendant does not have to pay for the unforeseeable circumstances

Kirksey v. Kirksey

F: Kirksey (widdow) is suing Kirksey (brother in law) over breach of contract to get damages after he stated that she could stay on his land and raise her children after her husband died. I: Would an action lie for breach of contract or was it a mere gratious promise. R: A gratuitous promise is not enough for consideration and not necessary for a contract. A promise made out of moral obligation lacks consideration. A: The court relied on the fact that the brother only made the promise out of moral obligation to provide for his brother's wife and children. C: The court enforces the rule that a promise made out of moral oblication lacks consideration and does not form a binding contract.

Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co.

F: On February 21, 1924, the commissioners passed a resolution holding that the bridge contract was not enforceable, and informed Luten that the County would not honor the contract. The County directed Luten to not proceed with building the bridge, and stated that any further work completed by Luten would be done at the company's own risk and expense. At the time Luten was informed that the County would not proceed, it had performed approximately $1,900 worth of work on the bridge. However, Luten continued construction and finished the bridge project. Luten then brought suit against the County for the contract price. I: Whether, after receiving notice of a party's breach of a contract for services, the non-breaching party may continue to perform the contract to completion and recover the full contract price. R: When a non-breaching party in a contract for services receives notice of another party's breach, the non-breaching party must treat the contract as broken when notice is received, cease performance, and sue for any losses sustained from the breach as well as profits that would have been realized upon performance. A: When a non-breaching party in a contract for services receives notice of another party's breach, the non-breaching party must treat the contract as broken when notice is received, cease performance, and sue for any losses sustained from the breach as well as profits that would have been realized upon performance. The non-breaching party may not incur additional costs after notice is provided and then hold the breaching party for damages which did not need to be incurred.

Ever-Tite Roofing Corp. v. Green

F: Plaintiff made a contract with Green to renovate house as soon as possible. When the roofers showed up there were other people doing the work. I: Is there acceptance of contract? Is communication an offer or an invitation to engage in negotiations. Whether an offer to form a contract may be accepted within a time frame specified by the offer, or if no time is specified, within a reasonable time. R: Offers may be withdrawn before acceptance, however there are exceptions: A: - The power to create a contract by acceptance of an offer terminates at the time specified in the offer, or, if no time is specified at the end of a reasonable time. - A reasonable time must be allowed therefore in accordance with the facts of the case and intentions of the party. A reasonable time is contemplated where no time is expressed, C: The court enforced the rule that after acceptance an offer can not be broken

Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores, Inc

F: Plaintiff sold his business to undergo a venture in the grocery business. Red Owl kept increasing the price of the store after every promise made untif plaintiff could not meet the requirement. I: Whether the promise necessary to embrace a cause of action supports a finding that a promissory estoppel should be used to allow the plaintiff to recover his damages. R: Promises that a party can reasonably expect to be relied on, or are relied upon may be enforced to prevent injustice A: Elements to be proven: ● Promisor made a promise ● Promisor should have reasonably expected promisee to rely on promise ● Primisee actually relied on promise ● Injustice would result if promise were not enforced. C: the court enforced the rule of promissory estopple to figure out the judgment of the case

Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal and Mining Co.

F: Plaintiffs agreed to lease their land to a coal mining company so that they could stripmine the land. In the contract the defendant agreed to restore the land to its original state. Doing that would have cost $29,000. Plaintiff received 5,000 which was more than the total value of the farm. I: When measuring damages, is the measure of damages the diminution cost or the cost of performance from the breach. R: No person can recover a greater amount of damages than they would have gained by full performance. A: The court states that although a breach of contract a reasonable property owner would not pay $29,000 of improvements only to increase the property value by $300.

Raffles v. Wichelhaus

F: Wichelhaus (defendant) entered into a contract to buy 125 bales of cotton from Raffles (plaintiff). Under the terms of the contract, the cotton was to arrive from Bombay via the ship Peerless. Wichelhaus refused to pay. Wichelhaus argued that the cotton was to be delivered by a different ship also called Peerless, which had departed Bombay in October. Raffles sued for breach of contract. I: Whether a mutual misunderstanding of the parties invalidates a contract. R:There is no contract if there is a mutual misunderstanding by both parties as to the meaning of a term of an agreement. A:There is nothing on the face of the contract to indicate which Peerless ship was to deliver the cotton. Where there is a latent ambiguity as to meaning, parties may offer parol evidence to explain the terms. In this case, the evidence shows that Wichelhaus meant one Peerless and Raffles meant another. Thus, there was no meeting of the minds and, hence, no binding contract. C: Ruled in favor of Wichelhaus

Lucy v. Zehmer

F: Zehmer was drinking with Lucy when a contract was formulated that stated "Lucy would buy the farm for 50,000 dollars. I: Was there a valid contract in this case because the defendant was joking around and intoxicated? R: The court decided this issue based on the fact that words/acts based on a reasonable standard create an intention to agree and does not consider the real state of mind. The objective, outward expression of a party's intent to be bound in an agreement, as opposed to that party's subjective mental assent to the agreement, is all that matters when determining the existence of a valid and enforceable contract. A: The mental assent of the parties is not required for the formation of a contract. There was a good faith offer and a good faith acceptance. No time prior was Lucy informed that Zehmer was not going to sell his farm. C: The court ruled in favor of Lucy and reversed the lower court's judgment.

Britton v. Turner

F:Plaintiffs agreed to lease their land to a coal mining company so that they could stripmine the land. In the contract the defendant agreed to restore the land to its original state. Doing that would have cost $29,000. Plaintiff received 5,000 which was more than the total value of the farm. I: The issue before the court is someone able to recover reasonable damages for their services that they performed before breach of contract. R:The rule of law is as follows: If a person makes a contract that is not fully performed, he is entitled to damages under quantum meruit. The amount will be the cost of damages subtracted from the cost of labor as a whole. A: No person can recover a greater amount of damages than they would have gained by full performance. Damages must be reasonable and cannot be grossly oppressive. The court states that although a breach of contract a reasonable property owner would not pay $29,000 of improvements only to increase the property value by $300

What is adequacy of consideration?

For a lawful agreement to be made between two parties, the offeree, also known as the beneficiary, must give in return, a fair price, that is either in equal measure or reasonably proportional to the value given by the offeror

What are recurring problems for consideration?

Forbearance/Gratuitous promises, Adequacy/Sufficiency, Past/Moral consideration, illusory promises, and promissory estoppel/reliance

What was the big topic in Hadley v. Baxendale?

Foreseeability of Damages

Your good friend, Sookie seeks your advice. Sookie had been in dire need of some extra cash to fix her home and decided to go to her friend Eric for some help. When Sookie approached Eric, he offered to lend her the money she needed in the following agreement:"Eric promises to lend Sookie $10,000 (ten thousand dollars) if, in exchange, Sookie agrees to pay Eric $10 dollars within the next 100 years and to repay the loan if she thinks she can afford it." Sookie fully intends to pay Eric back the full $10,000 well within the 100 years, and tells him that she will be calling the contractor that very day to begin repairs, and Eric says he will give the money to Sookie when she needs to pay for the repairs. The next day, Sookie hires a contractor to come and fix her house. When Sookie asks Eric for the money to pay the contractor, Eric refuses to give her the money unless she agrees to stop dating her boyfriend, Bill, and agrees to go out on a dinner date with Eric. After thinking it over, Sookie refused to break up with her boyfriend Bill and turned Eric's dinner date invitation down. Sookie is extremely upset because she now owes the contractor who fixed her home $10,000, and he has threate

ISSUE #1:Whether there is a legally binding contract between Sookie and Eric when Eric promises to lend Sookie $10,000(ten thousand dollars) if, in exchange, Sookie agrees to pay Eric $10 dollars within the next 100 years and to repay the loan if she thinks she can afford it.RULE #1:Per § 1 of Restatement (Second) of Contracts, a contract is a promise or a set of promises for the breach of whichthe law gives a remedy, or the performance of which the law in some way recognizes as a duty. There are three elements of a contract: 1) promise, 2) consideration, and 3) mutual assent. Per § 2(1) of Restatement (Second) of Contracts, a promise is a manifestation of intention to act or refrain from acting in a specified way, so made as tojustify a promisee in understanding that a commitment has been made. There are two elements of a promise:1) offer and 2) acceptance. Consideration, per Hamer v. Sidway, "may consist either in some right, interest, profit orbenefit accruing to the one party, or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given, suffered or undertaken by the other;" per § 71 (1) of Restatement (Second) of Contracts "to constitute consideration, a performance or a return promise must be bargained for." There are two elements of consideration: 1) something of legal value given and 2) in a bargained for exchange. Mutual Assent, consensus ad idem, or meeting of the minds occurs when a reasonable person could judge the acts and behaviors of the parties enough to objectivelyconstrue agreement (objective theory of assent).ANALYSIS #1:1) Promisea) OfferHere, Eric's promise to "lend Sookie $10,000 (ten thousand dollars)" would constitute an offer. An offer is the manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude it (§ 24 of Restatement (Second) of Contracts). Per Leftkowitz, "where the offer is clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract."As Eric's promise to "lend Sookie $10,000 (ten thousand dollars)" is a clear communication to which there is a definite and explicit amount

What rule of contract law did the court apply to the facts in Hamer v. Sidway?

In general a waiver of any legal right at the request of another is sufficient consideration for a promise.

According to legal experts in contract law, if I say to you: "If you go ove to the bookstore there, you may purchase a sweatshirt on my credit":

It is often difficult to determine whether words of condition in a promise indicate a request for consideration or state a mere condition in a gratuitous promise.

Jim contracts to make repairs to Luis's building in return for Luis's promise to pay $10,000 on completion of the work. After spending $8,000 on the job, Jim fails to complete the building because of insolvency. Luis has the work completed by another builder for $4,000, increasing the value of the building to him by a total of $9,000, but he loses $500 in rent because of the delay. Under the Restatement, Second, Contracts 374, what can Jim recover from Luis?

Jim can recover $5,000 from Luis in restitution less $500 in damages for the loss caused by breach, or $4,500.

What was the big topic in Alaska Packers Association v. Domenico?

Modification of a contract and duress

What was the big topic in Lucy v. Zehmer?

Parol evidence rule

What is the big topic in Wood v. Lucy Lady Duff-Gordon?

Mutuality, implied terms, and illusory promises

Frank Abbot, a senior partner in the law firm of Abbot and Abbot, provides a letter of employment and hands it to Darcy. The letter states that "this contract is not binding until accepted by the signature of the managing partner of Abbot and Abbot." Darcy signs the letter and hands it back to Frank Abbot, who also signs.

No acceptance. Here, only Frank Abbot has signed the letter. Darcy's signature would not be an acceptance of the letter, as the letter stated that there would only be a contract once the Managing Partner signed the letter.

A retired stockbroker in her sixties is physically frail and relies on her two daughters to help her with shopping, medical appointments, and other activities outside her home. One day while her daughter is bringing her home from a visit with a friend, the daughter stops the car outside the women's house and says to her " I'm concerned about what will happen to your assets in the event you need to go to a nursing home before you die. Don't you think you should give some money to each of your children to hold for you in case you have financial needs after a nursing home has taken all of your money?" She hands the retired stockbroker's checkbook to her. The retired stockbroker says, "You make a good point, but I want to look over my finances and think about it first." The next week, when the two daughters come to the retired stockbroker's house for a visit, she hands them each a check for $20,000. If the retired stockbroker later wants to void the checks, can she do so on the basics undue influence?

No, because she had time to consider the issue.

Every year for Christmas, a father gave his adult son a check for $5,000.the son, assuming his father would give him a check again for Christmas this year, purchased a $3,000 computer on credit two weeks before Christmas. The father, believing his son was too dependent on his money, did not give the son any money for Christmas. The son claims he can get $5,000 from his father in an action for promissory estoppel. Is the son correct?

No, because the father never made any promise to give the son $5,000. (was a pattern but not a promise)

A baseball card collector found a stamp box of old baseball cards he purchased at a garage sale. Not knowing anything about stamps, he listed it for $5 on Craigslist, describing it as a "typical airline stamp". A casual stamp collector saw the ad and purchased the stamp, not knowing in fact that it was a rare inverted airplane stamp, worth more than $2.5 million.After the true value of the stamp was discovered and extensive news coverage, the seller filed a lawsuit seeking damages of either $2,499,995, or the return of the stamp. Should the seller prevail?

No, the consideration was adequate and there was consensus ad idem

What elements does a promise need?

Offer and acceptance

What must there be in order for a contract to be valid?

Offer, acceptance, consideration, and mutual assent

Define a contract

Per Section 1 of Restatement (second) of contracts, a contract is 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 as a duty

The court in Henningsen rules that a person who, in reasonable contemplation of the parties to the warranty, might be expected to become a user of the automobile, may bring suit against the manufacturer. Under this reasoning, who cannot bring suit on an implied warranty of merchantability claim?

Persons using the car without purchaser's consent.

What do you think Justice Cardozo means by his use of the term "sacred talisman" in the following sentence: "The law has outgrown its primitive stage of formalism when the precise word was the sovereign talisman, and every slip was fatal It takes a broader view to-day. A promise may be lacking, and yet the whole writing may be 'instinct with an obligation,' imperfectly expressed."

Precise words are not required for a contract to be enforceable in modern courts.

What are Gratuity and Gratuitous Promises?

Promises that are without the consideration necessary for enforcement

A young man liked to hang around a local granite shop after school to watch the stone masons cut and polish granite. The man dreamed of opening his own granite kitchen remodeling business one day. He helped out by doing various odd jobs around the shop. One day, the shop owner asked him if he'd like a candy bar. The young man refused, saying, "The candy bar causes me to break out. I can't get a date because of my skin problems as it is." The shop owner had terrible skin as a teenager and felt sorry for the young man. He said "I'll pay for the skin doctor. Go get your face looked at by a dermatologist, and I'll pay the doctor's bill and bill for any medicine you need." The next day, the young man went to the board certified dermatologist, who examined the man, gave him an injection and prescribed a series of antibiotics. The doctor's bill and medicine cost $1,450. The young man brought the receipts to the shop owner. The owner felt the charges was outrageous and refused to pay. What is the young man's best legal argument for requiring the owner to pay the bills?

Promissory estoppel

What was the big topic in Feinberg v. Pfeiffer?

Promissory estoppel and past consideration

What was the big topic in Britton v. Turner?

Quantum Meruit Damages

What was the holding in Hawkins v. Mcgee?

Ruled in favor of Hawkins.

Define a Promise

Section 2(1) of Restatement (second) of contracts: A promise is a manifestation of intention to act or refrain from acting in a specific way, so made as to justify a promisee in understanding that a commitment has been made

What is the Rule of Law in ProCD v. Zeidenberg?

Shrinkwrap licenses included within a product's packaging are enforceable unless their terms are objectionable on grounds applicable to contracts in general, such as violating a positive rule of law or being unconscionable.

What are the two elements needed for consideration?

Something of legal value given and in bargained for exchange

What is consideration?

Something of legal value in exchange for a promise is a Necessary element for the existence of a contract, Contracts unsupported by consideration are generally not enforceable

What is the general rule for consideration?

Something of legal value must be given and there must be a bargain for exchange

What do courts uniformly agree on about contracts?

That every contract includes an implied duty/ promise of good faith and an implied duty/promise of reasonable efforts/due diligence

In Hoffman, the Court upheld all but the following awards of damages by the jury:

The $16,735 for the losses on the sale of the Wautoma grocery-store fixtures and inventory.

According to Judge Easterbrook in ProCd v. Zeidenberg, to make price discrimination work, what must the seller be able to control?

The ability of consumers to take advantage of a price difference between two or more markets.

According to legal experts in contract law if I promise to give my daughter, Marley, a valuable painting in exchange for her promise to give me $1 and she says nothing:

The agreement will not be enforced absent some rationale to enforce the promise without consideration.

A woman met with a prominent local artist and offered him $10,000 if he would agree to paint a series of portraits: one each of herself, her mother, her grandmother, and her daughter. The paintings, which she planned to name "Four Generations," were meant to be a gift for her grandmother's eightieth birthday. The artist agreed to begin the sittings in two weeks' time. The following day the artist began to prepare his studio for the sittings. He studied photographs of each of the women and experimented with various backdrops and lighting techniques to find the best choices for each of his subjects. He inventories his supplies and purchased the paints and brushes he deemed in need of replacement. Several days before the first of the sittings was to commence, the woman phoned to say the she was abandoning the project due to a downturn in her grandmother's health. The artist sued the woman for breach of contract. Which result is most probable?

The artist will win his action for breach of contract, because he accepted the woman's offer.

An artist was tired of living in the city. He placed the following classified announcement in the local paper. "I am interested in selling my condo for any reasonable price. I am moving to the country. First come, first served." When a local real estate broker saw the ad, he could not believe his luck. The condo was in a great location and would sell in no time allowing him to turn a huge profit for almost no effort. He jumped on the subway and raced to the condo. As he stepped out of the station, the broker saw the artist, who informed him that he was the first to come in response to the announcement. The broker told the artist that he wanted to purchase the condo the same day for $400,000 in cash with no contingencies. The fair market value of the condo was $350,000. The artist told the broker that he had a spiritual awakening and that he should not sell the condo. The broker was angry because he had arranged to borrow many at a 10% interest rate. He filed an action seeking specific performance to compel the artist to sell him the property at $400,000. Who will prevail?

The artist, because his announcement was merely an invitation for an offer.

A young man inherited his uncle's home. While cleaning out the attic, he found a book sealed in plastic with a note attached reading. "David Copperfield - 1st edition." Without opening the plastic covering, he offered the book for sale in a publication specializing in rare books. Several days later he received a phone call from a collector who offered him $500,000 for the book. The young man had a contract prepared listing the book as a "first-edition of David Copperfield, by Charles Dickens." He signed the contract and mailed it, along with the book, to the buyer. The following day he received an offer for $550,000 which he refused, saying that the book had already been sold. When the buyer received the book, he took it to a reputable authenticator, who determined the book was not a first edition but a third edition worth only $300. The collector returned the book with a letter saying that he was rescinding the contract. If the young man sues the collector for breach of contract, which of the following is accurate?

The collector will be able to rescind the contract, based on a mutual mistake.

The contract in Ever-Tite contained the following clause:".... This contract provides for attorney's fees and in no case less than ten per cent attorney's fees in the event same is placed in the hands of an attorney for collecting or collected through any courts."

The clause does not entitle plaintiff, Ever-Tite, to attorney's fees.

A contractor and a homeowner entered into a written agreement for the contractor to build a patio in the backyard of the homeowner's home, to the homeowner's satisfaction, in exchange for payment of $1,750. When the contractor completed the work, however, the homeowner claimed in good faith that the contractor had not performed the work properly, and he refused to pay the contractor anything. The nature of the contractor's construction business was such that he was in constant need of cash to pay his workers. On July 8, he sent a telegram to the homeowner, indicating that he desperately needed the $1,750 and requested that the homeowner send him the money before the end of the month. The homeowner replied to the telegram on July 12 that he would settle for paying the contractor $1,500 if the contractor agreed to repair the portions of the patio with which the homeowner was least satisfied. The contractor did not respond to the homeowner's telegram. On August 4, the homeowner mailed a check to the contractor in the amount of $1,500 with a note indicating "Payment in full for the patio construction contract per telegram of July 12." The contractor received the letter and check on August 7.

The contractor will fail, because he deposited the check with no objection.

In Peevyhouse, the court cited Groves v. John Wunder Co. a case, where the Minnesota court allowed a jury to give plaintiff in the amount of $60,000, whee the real estate concerned would have been worth only $12,160, even if the work contracted for had been done. The Peevyhouse court considered this result was authorized by which of the following rules?

The cost of performance rule

What was the rule in Hawkins v. Mcgee?

The court enforces the expectation damages rule.If breach of contract, the non-breaching party may recover damages based on the difference between the value of the contract as fully performed and the actual value of the non-breaching party's present condition, plus any incidental damages reasonably foreseeable to all parties at the time of contract formation.

What was the analysis in Hawkins v. Mcgee?

The court relied on the fact that McGee guaranteed a 100% perfect hand to make their decision

Suppose now that the agreement concerns armed robbery and homicide instead. New York state law makes it illegal to commit armed robbery or homicide. Uncle William offers, and Willie accepts, $5,000 to abstain from armed robbery and homicide until age 21. How would you expect a court to analyze this promise?

The court would not find an enforceable contract because Willie II cannot forbear something that is illegal (no responsibility or right to do that)

A large automobile dealership advertised its annual year-end sale on radio and television across the region. The ads specified: "One day only! Fantastic deals on luxury cars! Saturday, from 10-10, select models only $20,000. Hurry to claim yours- a deal this good won't last." A couple drove to the dealership and selected a top-of-the-line sedan, but when the salesman completed the paperwork, he listed the price as $28,999. The couple protested, citing the advertising promotion offer of $20,000. The sales man explained that the car they had chosen was not one of the "Select models" and they would have to pay the regular sticker price if they wished to complete the sale. If the couple sues the dealership for breach of contract, which of the following accurately depicts the outcome?

The dealership will win, because the ads did not offer and specific automobile for specific prices.

What important facts helped the court decide against the defendant's doctor and award damages to the plaintiff boy in Hawkins v. McGee?

The defendant's doctor said before the operation was decided upon, "I will guarantee to make the hand a hundred per cent perfect hand or a hundred per cent good hand"

What are expectation damages?

The expectation and what is actually delivered. Where you award the non-breaching party enough money to put them in the same position they would have been in had the contract been performed

What is the big topic in Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co.?

The mitigation principle implies that damages for breach of contract exclude any loss that the promisee could have reasonably avoided.

According to the court in Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores inc. which of the following elements is not required in order for the doctrine of promissory estoppel to apply?

There must be agreement on essential factors necessary to establish a contract between parties

Which of the following elements is NOT required in order for the doctrine of promissory estoppel to apply?

There must be agreement on essential factors necessary to establish a contract between the parties

A father accompanied his daughter to a seller's home to assist her with the purchase of a used car. During the negotiations the father orally agreed to guarantee the daughter's payments and to provide security for her loan. Several days later the daughter returned to the seller's home and signed the final agreement of sale, which contained no reference to the father's promise to act as the guarantor. The daughter took possession of her new car but defaulted on her payments six months thereafter. The seller sued the father for the outstanding balance of the purchase price. The father's best defense would be which of the following?

The parol evidence rule

According to the court in Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores, Inc., which of the following elements is not required in order for the doctrine of promissory estoppel to apply?

There must be an agreement on essential factors necessary to establish a contract between parties.

Which of the following findings was least important in the court's deciding in favor of the Henningsen's in Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.?

There was no privity of contract between the Henningsen's and Chrysler.

What is the test for legal value?

The promisee suffers a legal detriment and the promisor receives a legal benefit

A famous singer decorated her studio with guitars she purchased from all over the world. The singer loved to entertain, and help a large party in her home. At the party, a famous guitarist admired a framed two-neck guitar the singer had purchased from a rock musician in Liverpool, England. The guitarist told the singer that she would lover to own such an unusual guitar. On July 10, the singer mailed a letter to the guitarist saying, "I have been pondering about how much you liked the guitar you saw at my party, and I want you to own it. The price is $50,000." The guitarist was pleased to receiver the letter on July 12. Unknown to the singer, the guitarist had already mailed the singer a letter on July 11 offering to purchase the guitar for $50,000. The singer received the guitarist's letter on July 15. On July 16, a drummer, who had also attended the party and admired the same guitar, visited the singer and offered $51,000 for the guitar. The singer immediately accepted and gave the drummer the guitar. The singer then left a message in the guitarist's voicemail box informing her of the dale. The next dat, July 17, the guitarist showed up at the singer's home with $50,000 to purchase the.

The singer, because she revoked her offer by selling the guitar and informing the guitarist before the guitarist accepted the offer.

(True or False) Under Lefkowitz an offeror revoke his or her offer, so long as the revocation occurs before the offeree has exercised his or her power of acceptance?

True

(True or False) Under the rule and reasoning of the court in Ever-TiteRoofing Corp. v. Green, aunilateral offer, or an offer that invites performance of an act as acceptance rather than a return promise, becomes irrevocable as soon as the offeree has started to perform the act.

True

Arnie, thinking of his Buick, agrees to sell "the car in my driveway" to Bill for $400. Bill, thinking of Arnie's Mazda, agrees. It turns out the Mazda was in the driveway. Is there a contract? For which car?

There is a contract for the Mazda because it was the car in the driveway. (consensus ad idem)

George's Restaurant is in need of repairs after a brawl broke out between Cleaver and Darcy and offers the work to London Construction, stating "this offer may be accepted by return mail." Pamela, the owner of London Construction immediately takes the acceptance over to George's Restaurant personally.

There is an acceptance. In this situation, even though the offeror has added an express requirement to the offer, the language may be understood to mean that the acceptance must arrive in the same time as return mail would take. Here, personal delivery would even be faster than return mail.

Shazza offers her services as a journalist, but states " if Jones Publishing desires to accept this offer, the acceptance must bear the signatures of all members of the Executive Publishing Board." Jones Publishing sends its acceptance signed by only the Board Chairman.

There is no acceptance when the offeree, Jones Publishing, has not complied exactly with the requirements of the offer; that all members of the Executive Publishing Board sign the acceptance.

A baseball player and his agent negotiated a lucrative contract for the upcoming season. As a result, the team owner orally promised the player a $100,000 bonus payable after the last game of the regular season if the player showed his "Good faith" in playing his best all season. At the end of the season, the owner informed the player's agent that because attendance was down and profits were not as large as he expected, the promised bonus would not be paid. The player filed a suit against the owner for breach of contract. How is the court in a jurisdiction following the rule and reasoning of Woods v. Lucy Lady Duff Gordon most likely to rule regard the legal effect of the promise?

Unenforceable, because the promise was an illusory promise not supported by legally sufficient consideration.

What statement below best states the issue addressed by the court in Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon?

Was plaintiff Wood's promise illusory and therefore not supported by consideration, since it did not obligate him to take any positive action or do anything of an affirmative nature whatsoever?

What is the Rule of Law in Lucy v. Zehemer?

When a person's words and actions, judged under a reasonable standard, demonstrate an intent to agree to a contract, his/her unexpressed subjective state of mind is irrelevant.

What is the Rule of Law in Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, INC?

When an advertisement is clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract.

What is the Rule of Law in Hawkins v. McGee?

When one party breaches a contract, the non-breaching party may recover damages based on the difference between the value of the contract as fully performed and the actual value of the non-breaching party's present condition, plus any incidental damages reasonably foreseeable to all parties at the time of contract formation.

What is the Rule of Law in Britton v. Turner

Where an employee voluntarily breaches a contract for labor by failing to continue the agreed employment, the employee is entitled under quantum meruit to the reasonable value of the services provided, unless the contract specifically provides otherwise.

What is the Rule of Law in Alaska Packers v. Dommenico?

Where parties enter a new agreement under which one party agrees to do no more than he was already obligated to do under an existing contract, the new agreement is unenforceable for lack of consideration.

What was the issue in Hawkins v. Mcgee?

Whether there is a contract and what is the proper damages calculation

What is the Rule of Law in Hoffman v. Red Owl?

While promissory estoppel is the appropriate remedy in reliance cases, an injured party will only be awarded damages to the extent they have been displaced.

The court in Hamer v. Sidway focuses on the question of whether young William's promise to refrain from liquor and tobacco constituted sufficient "consideration" to enforce the contract? The concept of "consideration" in Contracts denotes the idea that "something of value" is given or received as part of a bargained-for exchange. What was given and what was received and what precisely was the "bargain" between William Sr. and William 2nd in Hamer v. Sidway? Can you state the consideration on both sides of the bargain in Hawkins v. McGee?

William Story II bargained to exchange his right to smoke and drink in exchange for $5,000 dollars

Rollem, an automobile retailer, had an adult daughter, Betsy, who needed a car in her employment but had only $3,000 to buy one. Rollem wrote to her, "Give me your $3,000 and I'll give you the car on our lot that we have been using as a demonstrator." Betsy thanked her father and paid him the $3K. Both Rollem and Betsy knew the demonstrator was reasonably worth $10K.After Betsy had paid the $3K, but before the car had been delivered to her, one of Rollem's sales staff sold and delivered the same car to a customer for $10K. Neither the salesperson nor the customer were aware of the transaction between Rollem and Betsy. Does Betsy, after rejecting a tendered return of the $3K by Rollem, have an action against him for breach of contract?

Yes, because Rollem's promise was supported by bargained-for consideration.

Supplier and Retailer talked at length about Retailer agreeing to buy as many bicycle chains from Supplier as Retailer would need each month. Finally, Retailer stated to Supplier, that Retailer wanted to order bicycle chains from Supplier, in an amount per month that would meet Retailer's needs. In a jurisdiction which follows the reasoning and the rule of Wood v. Lucy Lady Duff Gordon, does sufficient consideration exist?

Yes, because a covenant of good faith and fair dealing which allows for indefinite terms will be implied in interpreting the contract.

A well-known circus clown was approached by a restaurant owner. The restaurant owner told the circus clown, "if you balance yourself on top of my flagpole for two minutes, I will pay you $200." The circus clown then went to the sports store and purchased special shoes for balancing on the flagpole. After climbing up the restaurant owner's flagpole, but before the circus clown started balancing on top, the restaurant owner screamed, "I hereby revoke my offer!" In a jurisdiction following the rule and reasoning in Ever-tite roofing Corp v. Green, if the circus clown thereafter goes ahead and balances on top of the flagpole for two minutes, will he recover the $200?

Yes, because there was an offer for a unilateral contract that became irrevocable prior to the restaurant owner's attempted revocation.

You entered into a contract with a caterer to cater your daughter's moderately lavish wedding reception for a contract price of $20,000. One hour before the reception is scheduled to start, the caterer threatens to remove all of the food, drinks, decorations, etc., unless you promise to pay an additional $10,000. Because it is too late to obtain the services of another caterer, and not wanting to disappoint and embarrass your daughter and the family, you promise to pay the additional $10,000. At the conclusion of the reception, the caterer approaches you for payment. You write him a check for the original contract price of $20,000, but refuse to pay the additional $10,000. Which of the following answers is most correct, in a jurisdiction following the rule of Alaska packers' Ass'n v. Domenico?

You do not owe the caterer the additional $10,000.

What does contract law create?

a framework of rules for the enforcement of promises

To constitute consideration, a performance or a return promise must be ____________.

bargained for

A performance or return promise is bargained for if __________.

it is sought by the promisor in exchange for his promise and is given by the promisee in exchange for that promise.

The court in Henningsen rules that a person who, in the reasonable contemplation of the parties to the warranty, what might be expected..?

members of the purchaser's family persons using the car without purchaser's consent

The Latin term "quantum meruit" means which of the following in contract law:

the amount that has been earned