Final Review Second Practice problem Question 6 Modern Rule Necessity Minor Promisary Estopple There has to be a promise Employee vs Home Depot Case Quasi contract you don t have to have a promise The court just wants to protect from unjust o Express Warranry Where the Seller says something DIRECTLY in writing or implied enrichment Different Types of Warranty under the circumstances 1 Has to be a fact not openion 2 o Implied Warranty of Merchantability The LAW just gives the Warranty to the buyer regardless of what the seller says The seller HAS TO BE a Merchant Material Breach It u r the non breaching party u have the maximum remedy U can cancel the contract and get ur money BACK If it is non material breach u only get money back for the PART of the contract that the breaching party didn t fulfill Collateral Contract You promise to pay the debt of another person You r the guarantor The contract between the guarantor and the other party HAS TO BE in writing Exculptory Clauses where the business writes in the contract that you r not allowed to sue them if something goes wrong Ex usually against negligence Ex parents signing a Exulptory contract with school saying I don t sue if anything happens to my child due to the school s NEGLIGENCE Writing can be on ANYTHING as long the identity of parties subject matter identified with reasonable certainty and the parties signed it Doesn t need to be formal documents You have to RAISE the statue to clause or Writing issues for the court to consider them They will not consider it if u don t RAISE it urself Requirements to product liability you ALWAYS have to prove the 3 requirements Quantity is a MUST for UCC Manufacturing defect defect in one product Design defect ALL the products produced are defective Engineers messed up Gravamen test whatever ur claiming was wrong It focuses on JUST the PART of the contract Predominant Factor test goods or service Couple plane repair that was messed up Ex you repaired my car right but the COLOR is wrong Exchanges Not Consideration o Illusary promise a promise that doesn t BIND the promised It sounds like it does but it doesn t there is usually a hidden way out for the promisser o Preexisting duty you already had a duty to do due to a prior contract or the law required you to do it anyway There is no Consideration in this situation Ex brother makes contract with mom for painting sisters room and then makes second contract with sister Or I offer to help someone with moving furniture and then AFTER helping the person I ask for money Conciencibility Something was grossly unfair in the contract Mistake Jordan case You are allowed to rely on somone s statement But if the person tells u ahead of time that they cant do something u cant reply on them to Mutual Mistake Whatever the mistake was a important factor in ur entering the contract It has to be the reason u entered the contract You didn t bear the risk of the contract you had no way of trying to find out about the mistake Unilateral Mistake HAS TO MEET all the factors that mutual mistake has to meet PLUS the two o The other party influenced the causation of the mistake o Common Law applies to everything else UCC applies ONLY to the sale of goods Duty to Mitigate the non breaching party has to try to minimize their damages AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE to not be harmed by the breach of contract If u haven t tried to then ur remedy will be reduced by a amount of the damage the court thinks u caused urself Employment at will Public Policy o Employment policy
View Full Document
Unlocking...