BUS LAW

Offer

The outward manifestation of present contract intent to be bound by certain and definite terms communicated to the offeree.

Breach of Contract (BOK)

Refers to the failure to fulfill the terms of a contract

Certain and Definite Terms (QTIPS)

Quantity, Time for performance, Interested parties, Price term, Subject matter.

Ways to Destroy An Offer

Red Rover Does Lapse During School

Revocation, Rejection, Death of a party, Lapse of time, Destruction of Subject Matter, Insanity.

Option Contract

Keeps an offer open for a stated period of time and is supported by consideration; it is a separate contract.

Mirror Image Rule

Requires no variances or changes to the terms of the offer for acceptance. Key words are “I will” “Done! I will give you..”

Mailbox Rule

Acceptance is valid on dispatch, rejection is valid on receipt rejection is valid on receipt; whenever you have an acceptance given first in time, it will always prevail

aka: Acception anytime once it leaves, rejection anytime when it gets to the offeror 

Consideration

The bargained-for exchange or a legal detriment in a contract.

Pre-existing Duty Rule

• Party already has the obligation to do whatever the situation is

• Mom telling detective “I will give you money if you find my child”, once child is found, did not give money because it is the detective’s job 

Promissory Estoppel

• The promisor makes a promise to the promisee and the promisee detrimentally relies on the promise made and undue hardship would result if the promise is seen all the way through 

• 9am in the morning you get a phone call from your grandfather that lives in Oregon, grandfather asks hru and tells you that he has a few months left, wants you to be with them during his last few months and will give you money, wedding ring etc. ,Yvette will be there and tells Chapman and her husband, 10am father called and told her grandfather already passed, 4:45pm yvette was at the attorney estate and at 5pm the father and uncle showed up to get the heirs, offer was made between yvette and grandpa but although she did not serve him, it is valid through promissory estoppel

• Yvette relies on the promise made by her grandfather, the hardship is not having a job anymore because she was replaced

• 
  

Contract (K)

in order to create a valid contract, you must have an (1) offer, (2) acceptance, (3) and consideration

Revocation

only the offeror can take back their offeree

Rejection

only the offeree can reject an offer

Death of a party

when a party dies, the offer dies

Lapse of time

time has expired

Destruction of Subject Matter

the item is destroyed

Insanity

if you can prove the other person is insane, offer is destroyed 

Ways to Keep an Offer Open

option contract and firm offer rule

Grumbling Acceptance

look for words like, “I wished, had hoped for, desired a better deal but, ok” these words are deemed valid word of an acceptance 

3 items that are potential issues for consideration

past consideration, Pre-existing Duty rule, Promissory estoppel

past consideration

• past consideration is NO consideration

• Yvette is on the floor, you save her life, she thanks you and offers you money, you ask for the money but she says no, there is no contract and so NO consideration, considered as a gift not a contract 

• Yvette on the floor and said “if you save my life, I will give you money,” there is a contract and agreement 

bilateral contract

 a promise in exchange for a promise, majority contracts

implied/expressed contract

Express contracts include those in which the parties have orally stated the terms to each other or have placed the terms in writing. An implied contract is one in which the parties show their agreement by conduct.

valid contract

when it met offer, valid, and consideration  

void contract

void due to illegal contracts that goes against our laws (human trafficking, drug dealers) political issues 

voidable contract

can be voided at the option of the party (not right)

unilateral contract

a promised exchange for an act, very rare contracts, bridge hypotheticals given are unilateral (if there is anything about the bridge, it is unilateral)

Quasi-Contracts

 fictitious contract created by the court to prevent an unjust enrichment; pool hypothetical 

executed contract

contracts that are fully performed. ex. both parties have fully completed their tasks 

executory contract

contracts that have been only performed on one side ex. only one party has done it but not the other like picking up a dog at 11:45am, only one person has completed it 

mutual assent

Mutual agreement by both parties (mutuality of the agreement of the contract)

defense to contracts

minors, intoxication, mental state of mine

unilateral mistake

If the non mistaken party knew of the mistake or should have known of the mistake.

bilateral mistake

when both parties to a contract make a mistake about something important, such as the facts or the law. For example, if two friends agree to trade toys, but each think they're getting something different, they might decide to cancel the trade and keep their own toys.

undue influence

 Where a party uses their position of power over another - think caregivers, family members, etc 

duress

Through violence or threat to entice another to do something they would not otherwise do (undue influence + duress often go hand in hand)

Unconscious Contract

(think of the Lhotka v. Geo Expeditions case)  - Heavily favored towards a party

Statute of Fraud

 5 contracts that must be inwriting in order for them to be deemed valid (MRDOG)

M: Marriage s by their very terms cannot be completed within one year 

R: Reality 

D: answering for the debt of another 

O: contracts by their very terms cannot be completed within one year 

G: Goods of $500 or more

 what takes out of statute of frauds and or otherwise invalidates the statue of frauds as a defense

Mnemonic 

Signed writing

Part performance

Main purpose

Full Performance

Receipt in full or part payments or of the goods

Conditions

• Condition precedent: that party has to go first; precedes the other  

• Condition subsequent: the party that goes after

• Condition concurrent: same time 

defense to product liability

Misuse of product

Lotka (MCQ)

goes to defense to break a contract

Blake v Giustibelli ( both)

I: defamation (libel)

Rule - The false defamatory statement of and concerning the plaintiff communicated to a 3rd party.

Analysis - The lawyer was defamed by the client and stating falsified documents, excessive bill (4 times what was quoted)

C - Affirmed the court and found in favor of the lawyer that the past client was making false defamation statements.

Revel v guido (both)

I: fraud

claimed water tank was “brand new” but it was not at the property house 

Paulsgraph (both)

landmark case goes to negligence specifically causation

McKee v Laurion (MC)

I - Defamation (Libel)

Rule - The false defamatory statement of and concerning the plaintiff communicated to a third party.

A - Statements made by the Dr. were true, the Dr. even affirmed the statements were made what he said during his depositions.

C - Court found no valid cause for defamation, this was merely the family's opinion. 

Rylands v Fletcher (MC)

strict liability, … dangerous activities, dynamites 

 Raffles v Wichelhaus (mcq)

 bilateral mutual mistake

Taylor v baseball (both)

• I-Assumption of the risk? Does the defendant have a valid defense under

assumption of the risk?

• R-Where one volitionally undertakes (assumes) the risk involved.

• A-Avid sports fan, knew of the potential dangerousness of where her seats

were located and there is always the potential while attending a BB game

(or other sports event-soccer/tennis) of fly ball, loose bat...

• C-Found in favor of the BB club-Taylor knew of the.

Wilson sporting goods (both)

I - Product Liability - design defect

R - A defective product (manufacturing, design and warning label), has been placed in the stream of commerce causing damages, the user, consumer and/or bystander may bring forth a lawsuit against the seller, manufacturer, and/or retailer. 

A - The good mask was represented as being something it was not. There was a clear design defect, and the mask didn’t even meet the expectations of usual umpire masks that were on the market.

C - Found there was a defect in the design of the face mask. 

Lucy v zimmer (both)

I: contract/offer

R:

A: first time talking: Not drinking when they talked first about selling the farm

Second time: Drank beer while doing the contract, but did not stick through with the contract

C: intoxication is a defense

Animals

• Domestic look for known dangerous propensities

• Wild

product liability

 A defective product (manufacturing, design and warning/label), has been placed in the stream of commerce causing damages, the user, consumer and/or bystander may bring forth a lawsuit against the seller, manufacturer, and or retailer.

4 elements to negligence

• Duty: something you have to do

• Breach: the failed act of your duty

• Causation: the cause of your failed act

• Damages: -

defamation

 The false defamatory statement of and concerning the plaintiff communicated to a third party. 

2 forms: liable and slander

*if a worker was saying something bad that is liable or if there is a poster that says something bad, because they can film it, these things have permanency. Slander is non-permanency, such as sign language

Defamation Defenses for Privilege

• Truth (negates the first factor)

• Consent (validates the falsehood)

• Privilege (because of your position)

Privacy Torts

FLICD

F/L - False light

I - Intrusion into seclusion or solitude 

C - Commercial of appropriation (the use of one's name or likeness for their own benefit)

D - Public Disclosure of Private Facts (attorney/client, doctor/patient, pharmacy, churches)

defenses to negligence

• 1. Assumption of the risk-Where one volitionally undertakes or assumes the risk involved.

. Comparative Negligence

Comparing the negligence of both parties and apportioning the damages.

* If the plaintiff is 51%or more at fault than the defendant is not liable to the plaintiff for the damages.

3. Contributory Negligence-where the plaintiff contributes to his/her own negligence in

some jurisdictions this is a valid defense