Contracts & Sales I Case Illustrations

Allison v. Morgan Chase Bank

Allison v. Morgan Chase Bank

In a case involving a loan modification that resulted in the eviction of the Allison’s, the court held that JMPCB had breached contract through their improper recommendations and eviction of the Allison’s.

Kirksey v. Kirksey

Kirksey v. Kirksey: Gratuitous Promises

In a case involving a man’s promise to his sister-in-law to provide housing to her if she moved onto his land, the court held that it was a mere gratuitous promise and there by not enforceable.

Embry v. McKittrick

 

Embry v. McKittrick:

In a case involving the reinstatement of an employee contract, the court held that intent to form a contract was irrelevant if a party could reasonably conclude they entered one.

United Steelworkers v. US Steel

United Steelworkers v. US Steel

In a case involving an employer’s remarks that the overhead corporation is basing plant closings on profitability, the court held the remarks were a last-ditch effort to encourage productivity but did not bind the parties into a unilateral contract and the statements could not be reasonably relied upon by the plant workers.

Audiovisual Artistry v. Tanzer

Audiovisual Artistry v. Tanzer

In a case involving the installation of a home entertainment system, the court held that UCC applied and looked at factors including the price of goods and services, reasons for entering the contract, the nature of the contract, and the language.

Southworth v. Oliver

Southworth v. Oliver

In a case involving a neighbor providing estimates for a sale of property, the court held that even if direct language or a full contract is not present, the contract may still be binding if there was an offer and it was reasonable for the offer to infer that acceptance would create a binding contract.

Leonard v. PepsiCo.

Leonard v. PepsiCo.

In a case involving a Pepsi ad that offered a harrier jet in exchange for millions of Pepsi points, the courts found that factors relating to whether it was an offer, the court must look at the ability of the offeree to perform, the seriousness of the offer, price, and characterization of the proposal.

Pandhandle v. Smith

Panhandle v. Smith

In a case involving handwritten notations on a contract for reinstating employment, the court held that the contract was valid as the notations with an additional was already implied within the contract itself.

Russell v. Texas Co.

Russell v. Texas Co.

In this case, Russell sent an offer to Texas Co. requiring payment for continued use of his land for operations and stated that the continued use would qualify as acceptance; the court held that one cannot claim there was no intent to accept if he continues to retain benefits of the contract.

CIM v. Cascade

CIM v. Cascade

In a case involving a dispute of unpaid balances for invoices stating that full performance of replacing windshields would qualify as acceptance of that price, the court held that the unilateral contract for the lowered price was binding as full performance was completed.

Meyer v. Uber

Meyer v. Uber

In a case involving an end user license agreement that included an arbitration clause, the court held it was binding as the EULA had clarity and conspicuousness, gave reasonably conspicuous notice of the existence of contract terms, and the design and content of the interface made it complete.

Dickinson v. Dodds

Dickinson v. Dodds

In a case involving the sale of property with a date of required acceptance, the court held that the offer was revocable any time prior to acceptance and the efforts made to accept were invalid as there was notice of revocation and thus was not supported by consideration.

Drennan v. Star Paving Co.

Drennan v. Star Paving Co.

In a case involving a GC using a SC bid for their final bid, the court held that the offer was irrevocable as GC reasonably relied on the bid when submitting the final.

Walker v. Keith

Walker v. Keith

In a case involving a lease providing an option to extend with the same terms other than rent which would be determined when extended; the court held it was not enforceable due to a lack of certainty and failure to specify a method to determine rent at extension.

Hamer v. Sidway

Hamer v. Sidway

In a case involving a nephew’s promise to refrain from drinking, smoking, swearing, and gambling until the age of 21, the court held that the promise was enforceable as courts will not inquire as to the value or benefit of the promise but that the promises were exchanged to get the other.

SBA v. Betty Meador 

SBA v. Betty Meador

In a case involving Meador’s voluntary signature on a guarantee form for a loan that was not requested, the courts held that she was not liable for the default amount as it lacked consideration since it was not bargained for.

Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff

Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff

In a case involving an exclusive agreement for promotion, the court held that there is an implied expectation of reasonable action to perform, otherwise the agreement would have been illusory and unenforceable.

White v. Homewood

White v. Homewood

In a case involving the administration of a firefighter test, the court held that there was a lack of considerations as there was a pre-existing duty that required the administration of the test.

Langer v. Superior

Langer v. Superior

In a case involving payment to Langer for non-compete agreements, the court held the contract was enforceable and not a gratuitous promise as the promise was so as to get the completed NCA.A

Ricketts v. Scothorn

Andrew Ricketts v. Katie Scothorn: The Promise

The court held a promise was enforceable when Ricketts promised to pay Scothorn $2,000 claiming that none of his grandchildren had to work and neither should she, prompting Scothorn to quit her job as a bookkeeper relying on the promise.

Bank of Standish v. Curry

State Bank of Standish v. Robert N. & Kathleen Curry: The Promise

The court held that the promise was enforceable when the Curry's reasonably relied on the bank statements about approved lending that they relied on when barring participation in the buyout program leading to a significant loss in the business and default on prior loans.

Alden v. Presley

Jo Laverne Alden v. Vernon E. Presley: Promissory Estoppel; Reasonably Expected Reliance

The Court held that the promise was not enforceable in a case where Alden relied on Elvises promise to pay off the mortgage and pay for her divorce if she agreed to settlement. Elvis passed prior to payout of the mortgage, Alden did not complete the settlement and assumed responsibility of the mortgage, the court found that this was a gift that simply had not been given, and it was not a promise as Alden did not rely on it to her detriment.

Cotnam v. Wisdom

Cotnam v. Wisdom: Restitution Theory

In a case involving a doctor that performed lifesaving care for an individual that did not survive, the court held that surgeons are entitled to recover but the court erred in allowing evidence of ability to pay on behalf of the estate.

Toalson v. Madison

Toalson v. Madison: Unjust Enrichment

In a case involving the plaintiffs mistakenly improving property they believed to be theirs, the court held that a mistaken belief by the plaintiff is not entitled to recovery unless the defendant did not object to the benefit being conferred and the plaintiff acted in good faith, allowing them to recover.

Dews v. Halliburton

Dews v. Halliburton: Unjust Enrichment

In a case involving leases to drill oil, the court held that the company was entitled to recovery from Dews as he benefitted from their services and accepted them without the formality of the contract.

Bailey v. West

Bailey v. West: Unjust Enrichment

In a case involving the care of a horse, the court held that there was no recovery as the there was no benefit conferred without the volunteering of services to the horse.

EPIC v. Salt Lake County

EPIC v. Salt Lake County: Unjust Enrichment – The Benefit Received

In a case involving medical treatment to inmates, the court held that EPIC physicians conferred a benefit on the County by enabling it to fulfill its constitutional and statutory obligations to provide medical care to inmates.