Anover speeding truck carrying fireworks hits Anthony’s SUV frombehind at the traffic lights. As a result, Anthony’s SUV is damagedbeyond repair Silvio and Paul are hospitalized. The damages amountto 115, 000 dollars: 85000 and 30000 for SUV and hospital billsrespectively.
Theconduct led to an accident as result of negligence perseany reasonable person would have slowed down at the point of trafficlights. The fact that the truck driver did not slow down shows afailure on his part to care for his neighbor, a duty he owes. Thedefendant ought to have known his actions would result in a breach ofthis obligation(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).
Also, the accident not only risked the lives of Anthony, Paul, andSilvio but also could have caused their death. The truck carriedfireworks which could have exploded.
Thereis also an issue of damages, the plaintiffs suffered emotionaldistress and also were hospitalized while the SUV was completeddestroyed. The plaintiffs can sue for damages for any loss ordistress caused as a result of the harm they suffered due to driver’snegligence per se(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).
Theissue will be heard in superior court which has jurisdiction to hearcases with over 25000 dollars in actual damages(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).It can be supported by the fact that the actual damages amount to115000 dollars.
Anthonywent to Queens Company and held a gun to the Vice President. As aresult, a contract was signed under duress shortly after beinginvolved in an accident. It allowed the Queens Company to use Anthonytrucks for waste removal while paying him a monthly fee. The vicepresident took the contract to the president and instructed him tosign immediately after waking him up. Also, the vice presidentmisrepresented the facts of the agreement to the president. Thepresident signed the deal in an unstable state of mind.
Asa result of duress or coercion, the contract was signed the act ofAnthony holding a gun to the Queens vice president to sign thecontract. Coercion means a threat or actual violence(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).Under normal circumstances, the vice president would not have signedthe contract. If it is proven that the contract was under duress,then it is voidable at the option of Queens Vice President(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).
Also,if it can be proven that Anthony was not in the right state of minddue to the accident, it would render the contract invalid absorbinghim of any legal liabilities. That would be a defense of his actions.
Thereis also an issue of misrepresentation of facts(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).What a vice president tell his president about the deal is false fromthe actual details. The president signed the contract knowing it is adeal with a local vendor, for truck parts. While indeed, it allowedthe Queens Company to use Anthony trucks for waste removal at amonthly fee. Lying to the President, because there is an element oftrust to sign the contact, amounts to fraud.
Also,the president is still not fully awake at the time he signs thecontract. The contract is voidable at the option of the President ifhe can prove he was notin the right state of mind (Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).He was groggy when signing the contract.
Thecases will be brought before a district court because the amount anyclient will seek for damages is speculative.
Advertisementshave been customarily viewed as an invitation to treat. A contractexists actually when a consumer picks a commodity and presents thepayment at the counter. The customer offers to buy, and the selleraccepts by taking customers money.
Nolegal contract exists when a customer responds to advertisements(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).The courts reason that it would not be logical to form a contractwhen the idea for publication was to make the consumer aware.
Theexception, however, exists where a seller explicitly and clearlystates in particular terms and promises to do something, and no issueis uncontested. For example buy two get one free, the acceptance ofsuch an invitation completes a contract. Paul explicitly gave time,specified a commodity and the date. Jim entered the store at theprecise time, date and purchased the product as defined by Paul. Suchdetails made the invitation a contract. Thus, Paul was liable to payJim, the Barbeque set. And he should not promise if he intended notto keep the pledge.
Thecase will be brought before the district court as barbecue set pricewill be less than 25000 dollars.
Paulenters into an agreement to purchase all of 19 plasma TV produced bySony. One thing is clear that the contract binds Paul. But we are notsure whether the contracts bounds Sony to sell all TVs it creates toPaul. Also, there is also a question of standard reason, what does“all” stand for indefinite terms. Does all mean 1000 TVs or 100TVS or what Sony will produce? “All” can only be determined bySony and Paul will have to accept what is defined by Sony as “all”?One party has more control on the contract than the other.
IfSony produces a standard number of TVs with a particular time of themonth for instance like 1000 TVS, then all would mean 1000. But thecontract does not reveal a lot of details to solve the ambiguity ofthe amount agreed thereof.
Whena dispute arises, and the matter is brought before the court, thecourt looks into the details of terms and conditions. A contract willnot be complete if its terms and conditions are unclear. The disputebetween Sony and Paul resorts from lexical ambiguity. If the courtcannot determine what the word “all” meant, then the contractwill be void for vagueness.
“All”in this case has more than one meaning, but if the term of quantitywas definite, for example, Sony produces 1000 TVs in a month then“all” in a month would mean “1000.” Thus, Paul would beliable for breach of contract if the terms of the agreement wereclear. In this case, they are not.
Thecase involves a lot of expensive shipment, but yet the amount thatcan be sued for breach of contract under damages is speculative.Thus, the right court to hear the case would be district court(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).
Silviodecides to sell his home to buyers who he advises that, it wasallowed to have two families in a single house. Silvio agent concurswith the information. But later, the customer is informed by thelocal Building Department for the town that the zoning laws allowonly a single family dwelling for the new house.
Thereis an agency relation between Silvio and the real estate broker. As aresult, there was vicarious liability or master- servant relationship(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).Silvio presents false information which is supported by his agent.The misrepresentation of fact by the Real estate broker working onbehalf of Silvio makes Silvio liable for any actions that resultedfrom the real estate agent while he acted under his authority onlegal capacity. Though contributory negligence can be used asdefense, it will have a challenge. The real estate broker has aspecial expertise in real estate, thus it can be argued that, he hadundue influence on the buyers. Also, Silvio did not show intent tocorrect the broker’s remarks.
ALand Court will hear the case. It has jurisdiction to handle caseswhich relate to real property issues.
Issue:Partnership, Contract, Consideration and Credit Rating
Steinand his son jointly own an appliance store. When a business isjointly owned, it is common sense that both trading partners shouldparticipate in any contract that concerns the business not unlessone party acts as the manager of the firm. If Stein served under theauthority given to him by the corporation, the contract binds thepartnership: But if he signed outside his authority and legal right,the contract does not hold. When Stein borrowed a personal loan, heformed an agreement with loaners. The consideration for Stein and hiscorporation was capital while for loaners was the interest forlending. Also in the personal loan, Stein would receive money whileloaners expected the refund with interest.
Also,there is an issue that Stein has issues paying credit. If Stein is apoor creditor, the loaners might face a lot of liability in caseStein fails to pay as he has a known poor credit rating but still theloaners loaned him.
Issue:Constrain of Trade Contracts and Their Exceptions
Steindecides to sell his business to GP Pritchard. They agree that Steinis not supposed to start a business that prevents him from operatingan appliance store. Stein reluctantly signs due to financialdifficulties. Such contracts are primafacienull at Common law as they are conflicting to public policy(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).
Howeverthey can be enforced if the restraint was to safeguard the interestof restraining party, the effect of restriction was not injurious,and it was reasonable to the party being controlled(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).In the case where the operation of an appliance similar to the oneStein had, Pritchard can enforce such a clause on the radius of 10miles but for ten years period would be unreasonable to Stein.
Pritchard’sagreement that his employees should not work for his competitors fora period not less than ten years is unreasonable. That clause denieshis employees freedom of movement and expression. It denies themtheir fundamentals rights of liberty for the unreasonably long timeof 10 years. The period can result in injury on the party restrained.
Issue:Contracts against Public Policy
Steinopens a business and commits its clients to sign a contract whichabsorbs him of liability as a result of negligence. The contract isvoid as it is against public policy(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015):It intends to deny parties the right to seek legal redress. Law wasfounded on the principal of justice and not to protect injustice. Theclause that protects Stein from negligence liability is laughable inlaw. We owe a duty of care to our neighbors and should exercise everyaction with reasonable care to avoid injuring or causing harm. Steinis liable for any damage that results from negligence from hisactions. He owes his neighbor a duty of care. Thus, the contract isnull and void.
Issue:Terms of Hire Purchase
Underhire purchase, if a customer defaults on payment, the sellers cannotrepossess the goods if 2/3 had been paid without a court action. Theclause serves to protect the hire from “snatch back”. If thebusiness person repossesses the goods in contravention to the clause,the agreement is terminated, and the hirer is discharged fromliabilities that resulted from the agreement. The hirer or guarantoris entitled to repossess any security or any amount that had beenpaid under the contract. Pritchard can reclaim the goods in case ofdefaults, but he will be bound by the laws governing hire purchase.
Issue:Capacity of Minors to Contract
Childrenor people who are not liable to contract if are provided withproducts which are considered necessary the contract is void,voidable or can bind them(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).When a teenager entered Pritchard business and bought a flat screen,sneakers, and groceries without being questioned he entered into avoidable and binding contract.
Theagreement is partly binding because groceries and shoes would beconsidered necessity if it can be proved that the minor needed them.Thus, he is bound to pay for them. On the other hand, a flat screenis not a necessity and thus any contract does not bind the teenager.The Pritchard Corporation is liable to return only the money thatdoes not relate to the basic needs, in this case, the TV. The courtsact as guardians of minors.
Issue:Capacity to Contract of Insane Persons
Whena person is insane, he/she cannot make a deal with anyone. However inthe case of necessity, the contract can be void, voidable and binding(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).In this case, Theodore grandmother is declared insane by NYS courts.Theodore wants cable TV installed and uses his grandmother who is ofunsound mind to sign a contract. Theodore is the one with the legalcapacity to make a contract on behalf of the grandmother as he is herguardian but not the other way.
Theelements of a valid contract are the ability to contract. The CableTV network company entered into an agreement with an insaneindividual who did not know the consequences of the actions.Theodore’s mother is right to request the company to undo the work,and her actions are enforceable in the court of law. The companyshould cut the TV network cable connection.
Whena person chose to act as a guarantor, he should sign a writtendocument. When Stein’s son went to borrow cash from the bank, thebank would not have given the loan until it the guarantor form wassigned. The promise to “make right” his actions does not legallybind him it is not enough to warrant the bank to offer the loan. Theliability falls on the bank for not being cautious when exercisingits mandates(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015). The creditor did not take steps which were necessary to protect hisinterest. He acted negligently towards safeguarding the loan.
Issue:Written Contracts v Negotiations
Let’ssay, to avoid ambiguity parties may agree to put down the agreementin writing and conditions which govern the contract. In a case wherePritchard is having negotiations with the seller of property anythingsaid at this time can be referred as a suggestion. In such contractany issue to be effective, it has to be captured in written form. Thecourt will look at the fact and terms of the contract. If it isevident before the court that the agreement did not cover the issue,it will not be enforceable. As enforcing it invalidates the contractwhich states the final word is one that had been put down on paper.
Issue:Consideration and Legal Obligation
Onething is clear. Stein’s son had met with a girl of his dreams andagreed to marry her way before the daughter’s father made thepromise. Under the law, he was obliged to marry that girl notmarrying her would have amounted to a breach of contract(Clarkson, Miller & Cross, 2015).The promise was if he married the daughter he gets a Jaguar Auto. Thefather fails to fulfill the pledge, and Stein’s son wants to suethe father for default and divorce his wife.
Thegrounds of divorce are void. Stein’s son agreed to marry the girlof her dreams way before the father made a promise. The marriagedecision was not in any way affected by father`s promise. What wasthe consideration for his father in law when he promised the Jaguar?Can one make a contract on subject matters that he is already obligedby law to fulfill? If stein’s son was to give an amount or anythingin return there would be a consideration but he didn’t. Stein’sson action to marry was the fulfillment of a contract he had alreadymade. His father in law claim can be seen as a promise of a gift.
Issue:Privity to Contract
Pritchardenters into an agreement with a Harry Banilow a composer and singer.They agree to record a theme song for Pritchard’s commercialadverts. Banilow does not honor the contract but goes on personalAsia concert and refers his friend to fulfill the contract withPritchard. Pritchard is right to be furious, and can sue HarryBanilow for breach of contract. Bob is not a privity to contract, andhe has no mandate to act on behalf of Banillow(Clarkson,Miller & Cross, 2015).If there was an agency relationship between Bob and Banilow, then Bobcould have worked on his behalf, but this was not the case.
Clarkson, K. W.,Miller, R. L., & Cross, F. B. (2015).Businesslaw: Text and cases(13th ed.). Stanford, CT: Cengage.