Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
135 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Primary Sources of Law
|
Legislature, Judge made law, consitutional law, administrative law
|
|
Legislature
|
federal-internal code
State- partnership laws, statues |
|
Judge made law
|
cases, like common law
|
|
Constitutional law
|
US + State
|
|
Administrative Law
|
Federal and state are giving many rule-making authority to give rules that have the same affect as statue
|
|
Examples of Secondary Sources of Law
|
Books, treatises, law review articles (courts rely on these to develop the law)
|
|
Why do we have courts?
|
To settle disputes
|
|
Federal Courts
|
US supreme court
Federal Circuit court of appeals(covers several states...13 circuits in Fed. system) Federal District Court (trial court of federal system, each state has at least one) All judges are appointed by the president for life. |
|
State Courts
|
Highest State Court
Intermediate Int. Appelate Court (has to be proper jurisdiction) Trial Court |
|
Sershiarary (sp?)
|
Supreme courts discretionary choice of cases
|
|
2 bases for jurisdiction in federal court
|
1. Diversity of citizenship-opposite sides of case are citizens of different states, controversy exceeds $75,000.
2. Federal question- case involves interpretation of federal statue or US constitution |
|
Pleadings
|
documents that lawyers file in a case
|
|
complaint
|
1. statement of courts jurisdiction
2. statement of claim, showing that plaintiff is entitled to relief, a cause to action, legal theoryof liability. 3. Demand for relief (usually money damages). What does plaintiff want? Civil case is compensatory not punitive *if money damages are not adequate or irreperable relief, court enjoins (orders) defendant to do something- if violates- contempt of court |
|
Equitable relief
|
wants an injunction (order) from the judge to prohibit something/mandatory injunction- perhaps fix what you did?
|
|
specific performance
|
equitable remedy for breach of contract- ordering the seller to do the contract wehn money damages are not adequate or defendant faces irreperable harm.
|
|
Do you need a legal theory for specific performance?
|
Yes. Notions are dismissed for lack of this.
|
|
Motion for Summary Judgement
|
A motion requesting the court to enter a judgement without proceeding to trial. The motion can be based on evidence outside the pleadings and will only be granted if no facts are in dispute.
either party can file no issue of material fact that's in dispute |
|
Law and facts decision w/ judge and jury
|
judge decides the law
jury decides the facts |
|
Law and facts decision w/ only judge
|
judge decides law and facts
|
|
stare decisis
|
using precedence for judges decision to decide cases.
example: VA state court-if one case is decided and another case has the same facts, then the decision is the same. VA state court has binding authority on lower courts(i.e. appelate) (as long as the facts are the same) -VA state court does not have binding authority on GA state court -Creates reliability and consistancy in the law |
|
exception to stare decisis
|
VA hasn't looked at the case in 100 yrs and case comes up, lots of other states made diff decisions- possible that there's no binding authority
|
|
Contracts Law (key points)
|
-Is there a valid contract?
-Does it have to be in writing to be enforceable? (some are, some aren't) -Interpret language -Performing the contract If there's a breach, what are the remedies? |
|
3 binding elements of a contract
|
-offer
-acceptance -consideration |
|
3 types of contracts
|
expressed, implied in fact, implied in law
|
|
expressed contract
|
parties agree in words (oral or written)
|
|
Implied in fact contract
|
mutual promises are inferred by the person's actions or conducts (not words) inferred promises (mutual agreement)
|
|
Implied in law contract
|
"quasi-contract"- to avoid unjust enrichment-purpose. the law fictionally implies a promise to pay for benefits recieved.
1. Plaintiff confers a benefit on defendant 2. P expects to be paid 3. D does not expect to pay 4. P is an officious intermeddler 5. It would be unjust enrichment for the D to have the benefits and not to pay the P *i.e. doctor saves an unconscious person. they get better, doc sends bill. needs to pay. *neighbor paints house without permission and you watch |
|
officious intermeddler
|
someone who does something for someone else
ADD? |
|
2 elements for an offer
|
1. promise- manifestation of apparent intent
2. bargain- induce something from the other party |
|
Offer- 5 questions
|
1. Is there a promise?
2. Is there a bargain? 3. Is the offer still open at the termination of the contract? 4. What does offeror ask for acceptance? 5. Is there an acceptance? |
|
Objective theory of contracts (rule of law)
|
-promise- manifestation of present contractual intent
-present assurance of willingness to enter into a bargain -would a reasonable person hearing or seeing the words reasonably believe that he could conclude a bargain merely by giving his assent -what could a person hearing or seeing the words reasonably believe the outward manifestation of the speaker or writer to mean under all the circumstances |
|
Bargain
|
-test- benefit to promisure-trying to induce something-a return promise beneficial
*gift promises are usually unenforceable |
|
(specificity of) Terms of contract
|
Terms (price, time) and definitions must be definite enough
-bad example-"all the steel I produce I'll sell to you." -the more terms are certain the more likely the court will say it's an offer. If there aren't definitive terms, court may decide its not an offer. A offers to B, can C accept?...NO |
|
Bilateral Contract
|
If the offeror is asking for a return promise from offeree
"I promise to give you my book if you promise to pay me $10" |
|
Unilateral Contract
|
Offerer is bargaining for offeree's complete performance (even substaint
"I promise to give you my book, if you get me $10 to my office by 5" |
|
Is the offer still open at time of acceptance?
6 ways an offer can be terminated |
1. lapse of time (may be specified in offer, if not specified, offer stays open a reasonable time)
2. If offerer or offeree- death or insanity 3. Destruction of subject matter 4. Supervening illeagility-example- prior to acceptance legislature makes buying something illegal 5. offeree rejects offer 6. offeror revokes offer prior to acceptance, could be expressed revocation. "I revoke" "take back" or indirect revocation |
|
Ways offeree can reject offer
|
1. expressed rejection "no", "I reject"
2. Counter offer acts as a rejection of offer. (change terms of offer, qualify or condition of acceptance, add terms) *offeree loses power when it has been rejected |
|
Mirror Image Rule
|
Offer must be accepted on same terms as original offer
|
|
Grumbling Acceptance
|
offeree rises to level of dissatisfaction but doesn't rise to actual disent
|
|
Indirect revocation
|
offeree finds out info from reliable source (i.e. agent) that the offeror has taken some action that shows that he changed his mind.
*i.e. offeror sold land to someone else (varies by state whether it should be by sale or whatever) |
|
Firm Offer
|
offer, by its own terms that states a date to which it will be open.
Can that be revoked? Yes! Any offer can be revoked prior to acceptance *exception option contract (irrevocable) |
|
Option Contract
|
-you pay or promise to pay
-bargained for -if its not bargained for, just nominal (i.e. $1) -nominal consideration, you need it in writing -offeree promises to pay consideration for promise from offeror to keep offer open to certain date. |
|
Effects of an Option Contract
|
-1. promisore has duty not to revoke
2. offeror loses power to revoke offer 3. offeror dies, offer will not lapse 4. offeree makes counter-offer during option pd, it will not terminate offerees ability to choose original offer. *possible that law can imply an option contract only for offer for unilateral contract |
|
When you accept an offer for unilateral contract through complete performance you...
|
-offeree has started complete performance, so offeror can't revoke
-no acceptance until she completes the offer -Substaintiality- began to perform (question for the jury-when?) |
|
reverse unilateral contract
|
offer doesn't contain promise-offer is created by beggining of performance and is accepted by offeree's silence when he/she has a duty to speak or by promise.
Offeree by words or conduct leads offeror to believe that silence will equal acceptance. Would offeror reasonably believe offeree's outward expression was his apparent intent to accept. |
|
Exception- silence constituting an acceptance
|
reverse unilateral contract
*fridges accidentally are delivered to wrong place, person accepts, should not have been silent, accepts offer by silence. |
|
Bilateral Contract (ways to accept)
|
-Offerer may authorize a specific act- if offeree does that act, then it is an acceptance. Moment he "waves the red flag". It can't be something he usually does anyway.
"park the car in my driveway if you want to accept the contract" |
|
Silence as acceptance in the Insurance Industry (3 elements)
|
1. The insurance application is prepared by the insurance industry
2. The application is in good order-applicant is qualified 3. The loss occurs after expiration of a reasonable time for the insurance company application |
|
Course of Dealing between parties
|
-Prior contracts/dealings between two parties
-yr 1-A promise, B return promise-valid contract -yr 2- A renewal, B silence- contract performance (continues for years 2-10) yr 11- A renewal, B silence- B thinks "no I didn't accept" Course of dealing created exception. A vaild contract. |
|
Acceptance
|
Objective theory of contracts- offeror reasonably believe offeree apparent intent to accept unqualifiably the terms of the contract.
|
|
Means of Accepting an Offer
|
-any means specified for or requested by offeror (or faster way).
-"this is the only way to accept"-absolute term -If offeror does not specify, than a commercially mean of accepting is reasonable |
|
When is the acceptance Effective?
MAIL BOX RULE |
When offeree properly dispatches the acceptance.
|
|
Exceptions to Mail Box Rule
|
1. If offeror say with clear language "offer is only accepted when I recieve it"
2. In some states, w/ option contract, to accept main offer, wouldn't be accepted until offeror recieves it. 3. Suppose offeror suggests a request of acceptance and offeree accepts by different means (of communication) then acceptance is not effective until recieved by offeror and only effective when its recieved within the time that it would have been recieved had the suggested means of communication been used. |
|
What does properly dispatched mean?
|
put in the mail, proper postage, address, mailed
|
|
When is a rejection effective?
|
Not until it is recieved by the offeror
|
|
When is a revocation effective?
|
Not until it is recieved by the offeree
|
|
1. offeree mails rejection
changes mind 2. offeree telegraphs acceptance |
whichever gets there first is effective
|
|
1. offeree mails acceptance
changes mind 2. telegraphs rejection |
A contract was formed when the offeree mailed the acceptance
|
|
4 elements of estoppel (exception to offeree sending acceptance then changing mind and sending rejection) all have to be satisified
|
1. rejection got there first
2. offeror in good faith (not knowing acceptance in the mail) 3. Immediately 4.relies to her detriment *theory one party is holding out, and the other party reasonable relies on it. |
|
Consideration
|
-The third element of a contract
-2 elements- bargain and legal detriment |
|
Bargain test
|
benefit to promisure
|
|
legal detriment
|
doing something or promising to do something that you are not under a pre-existing duty to do. Or forebearing, refraining, promising to forebear from doing something you have a legal pre-existing duty to do.
|
|
Bilateral contract (legal detriment)
|
Both parties are bargaining for legal detriment
|
|
Unilateral contract
|
offeree- complete performance
offeror-legal detriment |
|
If we have a valid contract and want to modify it, you need new...
|
consideration
*only enforceable this way -Builder B contracts to build A's house, finds out losing proposition, B wants A to pay $2000 extra. No consideration! So not valid |
|
Exception to need for new consideration when modifying a contract
|
in some states- unanticipated circumstances doctrine
|
|
Unanticipated circumstances doctrine
|
1. circumstances were unanticipated when contract was made (not ordinary business risk)
2. circumstances make readjustment of terms of contract fair and equitable * example- lost ring, promise to pay reward for return. On duty police officer finds ring and returns. ( can he get reward?) No. He had PED. |
|
Debts (key points)
|
-Debtor owes creditor money
-A promise to accept less than full amount of liquidated debt is not enforceable due to contracts |
|
Liquidated debt
|
amount was certain
|
|
Unliquidated debt
|
amount is subject to dispute
|
|
Exceptions for unliquidated debt
|
Honest dispute exists about whether it is a genuine claim (gift vs. claim)
*gift promises are unenforceable because there is no bargain * any different performance by debtor will be legal detriment and enforceable |
|
Illusory promise
|
promisore has a completely free way out. "I'll buy a suit from you at whatever price I want"
*doesn't actually promise anything |
|
Canceling (under certain time amt.)
|
The less restrictive the right to cancel the better the chance it will be illusory and unenforceable
|
|
3 cases of illusory promise
|
3 common cases
*exclusive agency- one party gives exclusive agency (best effort to sell the product) to company to market a product * "All the steel I'll buy, I'll buy from Sam"- suppose you don't need steel (good faith and best efforts- not to go out of business) *good faith-legal detriment? -Nominal consideration- phrased as bargain for consideration. Has form of bargain, no real substance- i.e. father sells land to daughter for $1. |
|
Exception to illusory promise
|
-Signed by offeror
-in writing -recites consideration (for guarantee contracts and options) |
|
Doctrine of promissory estoppel
|
Exception to gift promise being unenforceable-
4 factors must exist- 1. Gift promise 2. Promisure should reasonably expect offeree to rely on offer 3. Promisee does rely 4. Only way to avoid injustice is by enforcing the promise |
|
Army Navy Case
|
*Bargaining for legal detriment from Young
* Young bargaining for LD from Army Navy * Customers get 5% discount *Army Navy bargaining for Young to promise to pay 8 1/2% and $2.10 *Young is bargaining for advertising (circular leaflets) *Young says he is bargaining for bringing in customers (he benefitted b/c patrons kept going to his store) *each was bargaining for legal detriment *bilateral contract |
|
Pfeiffer vs. Feinberg Case
|
*Feinberg has worked since 1910
-bookkeeper, manager, assistant treasurer *37 years -$350-400 -retirement package was a gift (apprecitation) -all the good yrs of work -gift promises usually not enforceable b/c bargain is missing -promissory estoppel developed 1. gift promise 2. should the employer expect her to rely? yes, b/c she was getting older, because she had been there 37 yrs and made you a promise (board of directors allows for expectation) 3. Did she rely? her testimony-she said yes. If she's credible. 4. Only way to avoid injustice by enforcing the promise -she's 63 -poor health-cancer -not employed -not employable -gave up a good career |
|
moral obligation
|
a promise based on a moral obligation or past consideration is not enforceable
*A intervenes voluntarily to save B's life, during which A is seriously injured, B based on moral obligation/past consideration makes a promise to pay A's hospital bills Exceptions -new promise to pay a debt that it barred -new promise to pay a debt charged in bankruptcy |
|
modern trend to moral obligation
|
-enforceable or binding to the extent necessary to prevent injustic but not binding that the value is disproportionate to the benfit recieved
|
|
Disaffirm a contract
|
contract is voidable
|
|
Lack of capacity (minor)
|
Contract of a minor is voidable up to the age of majority (18) and a reasonable time after.
|
|
Exception to lack of capacity (minor)
|
The minor is liable for the reasonable value of any necessaries. (implied in law theory)
|
|
Necessaries (traditionally)
|
food, clothing, shelter, medical expenses
|
|
A minor can avoid a contract by...
|
returning the thing in whatever condition it is in and the adult must return whatever the minor owned or the reasonable amount of it.
*even if it was the minor's negligence that damaged it. (still voidable) |
|
Mental incapacity
|
-one lacking mental capacity- can disaffirm contract, voidable
*cognizance rule- old rule- didn't know what was going on |
|
Informed desicion rule
|
-can't bargain, negotiate, or make a sensible desicion.
-person actually adjudacated as insane by court prior to contract- in most cases that contract will be void -if contract happens, and then declared insane after (soon after-voidable...if declared insane 20 years later- not relevant) |
|
Temporary Incapacity
|
-Test-whether the person is so drunk or drugged that he is unable to understand nature, effect and purpose of the contract.
-if necessaries were furnished- liable for reasonable amount of those necessaries *rescind-opposite of suing someone for breach |
|
4 different legal basis for which somone can rescind
|
-to undue the contract for any of these legal reasons (give back their things)
1. Mutual mistake of fact 2. misrepresentation -intentional (fraud) -negligent 3. Undue influence-innocent 4. Durress |
|
Fraud (6 elements)
|
1. false statement or concealment of
2. material fact 3. intent (knew or believe, should have believed it was false) 4. Should have expected other party to rely on it 5. Other party actually relies 6. Damages caused by misrepresentation |
|
To get recision in some courts you don't need to prove _______ (some you do)
|
damages
|
|
differnece between fraud and negligent-
|
only #3, false statement was made negligently-innocent, misrepresented
|
|
Undue influence
|
1. Feduciary or confidential relationship- lawyer/client, doctor/patient
2. promisore was vulnerable to influence of promisee 3. Promisee used excessive influence to overcome will of promisore |
|
Durress
|
Usually force or threat of force to compel another party to enter into a contract- can be rescinded
-economic durress-B needs A. It is not a basis for recision 1. wrongful or illegal act by one party 2. places other party in position where property or finances are jeaporadized 3. No other adequate means available to avoid threatened loss except by entering contract 4. durressed party acted as a reasonably prudent person by entering into contract (in yielding to coercion) |
|
Statue of Frauds
|
purpose to avoid frauds
|
|
5 categories of contracts- if they're not in writing they're not enforceable
|
1. contracts in contemplation of marriage
2. contracts for sale of land or an interest in land 3. contracts for sale of goods for $500 or more 4. contract that by their own terms cannot possibly be performed within one year after the contract was formed. 5. Suretyship contract-answer for somebody else's debt. |
|
2 purposes or functions of statue of frauds
|
1. evidentiary-know the terms of the contract later on
2. cautionary- thinking about the deal twice *always put it in writing |
|
What has to be in writing to satisfy the SOF?
|
1. Identity of parties
2. Description of the subject matter 3. terms and conditions 4. consideration on both sides 5. the signature of the party against whom the contract is being enforced conditions- -it can be any mark to indicate authentification of writing- can be typed, handwritten -doesnt have to be just one document -doesnt have to have signature at the bottom of the page |
|
contract for sale of land or interest in land
|
land-immovable
-interest in land- mortagage on a house, its a security interest in that property -easement-interest in property, right of way across someone's land |
|
contract of sale of land or interest in land- how can it be taken out of SOF?
|
-complete performance (by either party) would make it enforceable...i.e. building or giving all the money
-can it be removed for part performance?-only when what's being asked for is specific performance and not money damages, probably need evidence for prior improvement to land (ask about this- what evidence do you need?) |
|
contract for sale of goods $500 or more
|
goods-things that are movable
|
|
How can sale of goods be moved from SOF?
|
-to the extent that payment is made and accepted
-(so in the case that $7,000 is made of $10,000) -to the extent that the goods were recieved and accepted -to the extent that it is admitted in pleadings, in court "I bought 5.000 widgets" party being sued admits it -especially maufacturing goods exception (3 elements-all need to be there) A. goods being specifically manufactured for buyer B. goods are not suitable for sale to others in the ordinary course of the seller's business C. the seller before receiving buyer's notice of breach had made a substantial beggining of their manufacture, or a commitment to procure the goods. |
|
contract that by their own terms, cannot possibly be performed in a yr. (yr begins day after contract is made)
|
i.e.- K to work for life
yes b/c he could die -work for 5 yrs no, more than one yr -work for 1 yr work begins next day-yes -work for one yr, work begins day after tomorrow- no, cannot be performed in one yr |
|
contract that by their own terms, cannot possibly be performed in a yr. -taken out of SOF?
|
If the payment in full has already been made then it is enforceable
|
|
Suretyship contract
|
Answer for somebody else's debt
THE SURETY's promise ALWAYS runs to the creditor Surity's promise is of secondary liability. Their promise is if D does not pay then I will. |
|
Suretyship contract- remove from SOF?
|
1. Leading object rule-the main purpose of the promisure is to benefit herself economically
i.e. construction- owner has a general contractor and that runs to a subcontractor, w/out payment from general, sub will quit. If owner makes K with sub that they will pay if general doesnt then sub gives up right to quit. 2. Three party agreement called a NOVATION. A,B,C agree that C will give money to B, and A doesnt anymore 3. Not suretyship but still an exception-Mom promises Emily that she will pay Binns (enforceable). |
|
Conditions
|
-fact or event, the happening or non-happening of which creates or extinguishes absolute duty of the promisure
*In order to have a breech you must find that the alleged breacher had an absolute duty to perform |
|
3 kinds of conditions
|
1. condition precedent-has to happen first to create absolute duty
"I will sell you my book if temp. doesn't reach 100 degrees" 2. Concurrent conditions-payment and delivery -Mutually dependent performances capable of nearly simultaneous performance "you don't have to give me 100 until given book" "I dont have to give you the book until you give me 100" -if condtion precedent or concurrent occurs it creates absolute duty to perform -if condition subsequent happens it extinguishes previous absolute duty -"I'll give you my book and you give me 100 unless thare are pgs missing from the book" |
|
Need to be proven (conditions)
|
1. That all conditions precendent or concurrent either happened or were legally excused.
2. Plaintiff can show that the defendant breeached a contract |
|
How do conditions happen?
|
-oral, written-expressed conditions
-implied in fact-reasonable person would have thought existed even though not stated - implied in law condition to cooperate and not to hinder or prevent the other party's performance |
|
Legal excuses for non-happening of conditions
|
-if a party's absolute duty to perform relies on a condition precedent or concurrent there can be no breech of contract unless the conditions happened or were legally excused-creating absolute duty
|
|
Examples of being legally excused
|
1. one party prevents another party from performing or wrongfully hinders happening of condition
2. voluntary diablement- one party makes it appear by her conduct that she will not be able to perform when the time arises- only if the proper unit we're talking about is unique like land. 3. Anticipatory repudiation (breach)-if either party to a bilateral contract repudiates by words indicating the intent not to perform the other party can contrive it as a present, material breech and sue immediately-condition for other party's duty to perform. *positive, unconditional statement that states not going to perform. |
|
Only can be a breech is there is a....
|
absolute duty to perform (of other party). And absolute duty is created by the condition precedent or concurrent or if it is legally excused. If absolute duty is not performed-there is a breech of contract
|
|
Different ways contractual duties get discharged and dont have to perform
|
1. Impossibility of performance
A. Supervening (after contract is made) illegality or act of government B. Supervening destruction or non-existance of the subject matter C. Death or illness in a personal services contract. 2. Conditions subsequent happens, extinguishing previous duty 3. recision- mutual recision-fine -new contract- both agreeing to forebear from contract -unilateral recision- has to be legally proven- undue influence, mutual mistake of fact etc.- what do you need to do to rescind? -legal basis -notice to other party -give back whatever was given 4. Modification of contract -new contract (b/c its been modified), need new consideration 5. Novation-exception to suretyship, doesn't need writing -all three parties agree that A owes B, and then substitute C for A and now C will owe B. 6. Accord and satisfaction |
|
Accord and satisfaction
|
-executory contract- duties to be performed in the future by at least one of the parties (as opposed to already having been performed-the legal effect suspends the right to sue for money)
-when satisfaction occurs, then the duty to perform the old contract is discharged (giving $/product) can't sue for original contract of $2,000. *If there is bonafide dispute as to the amount owed (unliquidated debt) then if the check is tendered in full (what one party thinks is the full amount), if check is cashed, most states consider that accord and satisfaction and therefore party can't sue for full amount of debt *if it's liquidated debt, can sue because there is a pre-existing duty. |
|
Remedies for breeach of contract
|
normal remedy-money
damages intended to be compensatory, not punitive - exception - equitable remedy of specific performance, when money damages not adequate or when plaintiff can prove irreprable harm. *contract for sale of land (could be specific performance or money damages- (market price-contract price at day of breech) *battle of the experts to figure this out |
|
consequential damages
|
special damages, damages for lost profits.
*P owned mill, needed crankshaft cleaned and cleaner turned crankshaft back 5 days late. P never told cleaner that it was only crankshaft and that he had to shut down the mill, he can't sue for lost profits. |
|
objective standard (of consequential damages)
|
what would a reasonable person having knowledge of facts given to him by P, reasonably anticipate damages to be upon breach.
|
|
Doctrine of Avoidable consequences
|
-P-the non-breacher has a duty to minimize the harm caused by D's breech.
*i.e.-employment contract-need to make reasonable effort to find job in their field |
|
Employment contract
Employer is plaintiff, employee breeched |
-p cannot get special performance for a personal services contract
1. violates the 13th amendment (which prohibits slavery) 2. Can't tell if he/she is performing up to their ability 3. Courts don't want to supervise performance *Employer can't get mandated injunction for specific performance |
|
"Non-compete" clause on contract
|
can employer get a negative injunction to uphold non-compete-yes only within reasonable limit in space and time.
|
|
Where a negative injunction has been ordered the following five factors exist
|
1.uniqueness of employee services
2.employer was ready to perform 3. not close relationship (mom-son) 4. injunction will not leave the employee with no way to live 5. There is some competition b/w the plaintiff(employer) and some third party for whom the employee wants to work. |
|
Employee is the plaintiff and the employer is the defendant
|
1. loss of salary
2 expenses to seek employment 3. Should be able to recover cost of moving (in the case of moving work offices) |
|
Construction contract
Builder is the plaintiff and the owner if the defendant (breeches) 2 measures of damages |
1. contract price-reasonable cost to complete
2. cost of work done + (contract price-total cost) expected profits |
|
Construction contract
Owner is plaintiff, Builder is defendant measures of damages |
1. If substantial performance was not done (i.e. foundation doesn't hold walls) then the measure of damages is the cost to replace
2. If substantial performance was done, have to ask -can it be replaced w/o economic waste? (w/o tearing down the house?) *if yes-then the measure of damages is the cost to replace *if no-can't be replaced without economic waste, the damages are the diminution made from breech |
|
General rule for construction contracts
|
no specific performance...there are exceptions
|
|
Exception to general rule for construction contracts
|
1. if money damages would be inadequate and difficulty of performance is not difficult (extreme)
2. Land grading contract-not a lot of supervision required 3. Plaintiff can show they will suffer irreperable harm 4. Where damages are difficult to ascertain |
|
Liquidated damages
|
-parites put damages in contract if there is a breech
-enforceable? yes if, 1. damages difficult to ascertain when contract was made 2. they are reasonable (not in there as a penalty) |
|
Nominal Damages
|
Technical infraction of plaintiff's rights but wasn't really harmed
|
|
Equitable remedy
|
-reformation-equitable remedy where the parties have expressed their contract in writing
-in extreme case-allow contract to be rewritten to show their true intent. Normally has to prove preponderance of evidence, but in this case plaintiff has to prove the case by clear and convincing evidence of fraud. (this is usually a clerical error) |
|
Lucy v. Zehmer
|
objective theory of contracts
|
|
Minneapolis and St. Louis v. Columbus rolling mill
|
mirror image rule
|
|
Hoover v. Clements
|
paper company- whether there was a rejection
|
|
Feinberg v. Pfeiffer
|
she was working for pharmeceutical company- promissory estoppel
|
|
Army and Navy Stores v. Young
|
what rule of law?
|