GVPT331 Exam 2 Case Briefs

Alfred Baker v east coast properties 

Rule: Liability requires foreseeable proximate cause; unforeseeable intervening acts = superseding cause.

Holding: No liability—tenant’s actions broke causation.

Key: Alarm + reaction (not entry) caused injury → not foreseeable; plaintiff also >50% at fault (bars recovery).

Hammer v sidway 

Rule: Forbearance of a legal right = valid consideration.

Holding: Nephew’s abstaining made uncle’s promise enforceable.

Key: Consideration = detriment to promisee, even without benefit to promisor.

Mills v Wyman 

Rule: Moral obligation alone ≠ consideration (no enforceable contract).

Holding: No liability—father’s promise not enforceable.

Key: Past voluntary services (not requested) → no legal consideration, just a “naked promise.”

Hawkins v Mcgee

Rule: Expectation damages = value promised − value received.

Holding: Damages based on difference between “perfect hand” and actual result.

Key: Not pain & suffering → benefit of the bargain controls.

Cea v Hoffman 

Rule: Acceptance must be unequivocal; changes = counteroffer (rejects original).

Holding: Contract formed for refund of deposit.

Key: First response = counteroffer; second = valid acceptance before withdrawal → binding contract.

Drennan v start paving co 

Rule: Promissory estoppel—reasonable reliance makes offer irrevocable.

Holding: Subcontractor bound to bid due to GC’s reliance.

Key: Reliance in bidding → implied promise not to revoke → prevents injustice.

Matter of baby M

Rule: Contracts violating public policy (e.g., sale of parental rights) are void.

Holding: Surrogacy contract unenforceable; mother retains parental rights; custody to father (best interests).

Key: Payment for child surrender = illegal + against public policy; custody decided by best interests of child.

Kanaley v D, L, and W railroad

Rule: Duty to trespassers = avoid willful/wanton/reckless conduct only.

Holding: No liability—railroad not reckless; plaintiff barred.

Key: Jumping on train = trespass + contributory negligence → no recovery.

railroad co v. sout 

Rule: Landowners may be liable for dangerous conditions attracting children (attractive nuisance); child standard of care is lower.

Holding: Railroad liable; issue properly for jury.

Key: Unsecured turntable = foreseeable risk to children → negligence despite trespass.

Schmidt v gateway community fellowship

Rule: Recreational use immunity applies if land is used for recreation without charge; mixed-use = fact-specific inquiry.

Holding: No summary judgment—factual dispute on immunity.

Key: Mixed recreational/commercial use → jury must decide (totality of circumstances)

Martin v glass 

Rule: Landowners may be liable for dangerous conditions attracting children; negligence is for the jury if reasonable minds differ.

Holding: Liability allowed; case properly went to jury.

Key: Unsecured turntable = foreseeable danger to children → duty despite trespass.

Macomber v dillman

Rule: Negligence claim allowed, but public policy limits damages—no recovery for raising a healthy child.

Holding: Liability yes; child-rearing costs not recoverable.

Key: Birth of healthy child ≠ legal harm → recover only pregnancy-related damages.

state of bethiuame v. pratt md 

Rule: No implied consent for acts outside medical treatment; intrusion alone can violate privacy.

Holding: Jury could find battery + invasion of privacy; directed verdict improper.

Key: Non-treatment contact + photos without consent → unauthorized touching & intrusion.