Description of this paper

BLAW201 final exam




Question;QUESTION 1;1. 1. Every;workday at noon, Tom, Delilah, and Harry (TD&H) left their store, crossed;the road, and walked through Rebecca?s meadow to sit and eat their lunches at;the top of an embankment overlooking the railroad tracks. They made bets;on how many cars long a train would be or how many types of cars there would be;on a train. After a month, Rebecca had enough of their trespassing. On;July 10, 2009, she promised to buy each of them a pair of binoculars, keep a;path mowed in her meadow, and allow them to watch the trains from her meadow;for the next year, if they agreed to change the oil in her car for free at;their garage four times during the following year. They would be allowed;to use her meadow once the first oil change was performed. TD&H;agreed. Then Tom, Delilah, Harry, and Rebecca signed the contract, and on the;morning of July 17, 2009, TD&H changed the oil in Rebecca?s car.;Four months after entering into the contract;TD&H decided to sell their business and retire. They sold the company;and transferred all contracts to three ambitious Drexel graduates, Selma;Albert and Farid (SA&F). TD&H gave the binoculars to SA&F;since it would no longer be convenient for them to use Rebecca?s meadow to;watch the trains. SA&F began inviting their friends to join them in;the meadow to party on weekends. Rebecca was surprised to find new owners;the next time she took her car to the garage for an oil change. However;she was furious when she discovered that SA&F and ten to twenty of their;friends were using her meadow for weekly parties. Rebecca then erected a;fence and sued TD&H for breach of contract, arguing that they had no right;to allow SA&F to change her oil or use her meadow. SA&F then sued;to force Rebecca to give them access to her property. Decide, DISCUSSING;FULLY the arguments of all parties. (50 points);50 points;QUESTION 2;1.;2. On September 29, 2009, Dan Dawson began negotiating;a one-year contract whereby he was to become a management consultant to the J.;Consult Company from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010 with a salary of;$88,000. They also agreed that Dawson would be supplied;with a company car. On October 17, 2009;Consult presented Dawson with a contract, complete in every way, except for the;car. Dawson pointed this out to Consult, but she;told him, ?Don?t worry about such trifles. I?m a woman;of my word. You?ll get the car.? Then Dawson;and Consult signed the contract, and on January 1, 2010, Dawson began to work;for the company.;By January 22, 2010, it was apparent that there was;no car for him. Dawson threatened to sue for breach of;contract. What argument(s) could Consult use to avoid;liability for providing the car? Dawson;thinks he would be better off ignoring the written contract and instead relying;on their oral agreement, which did include the car. Do you agree;with Dawson? Why or why not? Describe the;relevant legal theories. (Do not discuss mistake;fraud, misrepresentation, undue influence or duress.) (50;points);50 points;QUESTION 3;1. 3. Gerald agrees to supply Danita with 400 dogs at a;price of $60 per animal. Danita informs Gerald that;she needs the dogs no later than September 17. Their;written contract also has a clause requiring the party at fault to pay the;other $300,000 in the event of a breach. On September;17, Gerald only delivers 200 dogs. Danita;locates another supplier, who ships her 200 dogs at a price of $110 per dog. Danita was planning to use the 400 dogs in a;dog food commercial, but had to delay the filming for three days. The total costs for the delay (crew, equipment;etc.) were $189,000. Danita sues Gerald for;breach of contract, claiming damages. Discuss;fully the arguments of both parties. Decide who;will win, and if Danita wins, how much, if anything, she will recover. (50 points);50 points;QUESTION 4;1. 4. Will Greene, an experienced promoter and producer;of musical concerts, entered into a contract with Len Rencel, a rock singer;whereby Greene would promote several concerts for Rencel. Rencel belonged to the American Federation of;Musicians (AFM), a union that represents most big-name musicians. The contract between Greene and Rencel was on a;standard, preprinted form required to be used by all AFM members. The contract contained an arbitration clause;that required any disputes regarding the contract to be heard and decided by;the executive board of the AFM. When a;monetary dispute arose between Greene and Rencel regarding the division of;proceeds from the concerts, Greene sued Rencel in court. Rencel;filed a motion to compel arbitration. Greene;argued that the arbitration clause was unenforceable. Is Greene;correct? Why or why not? What legal;theory will Greene argue? (50 points);50 points;QUESTION 5;1. 5. FreshCut, Inc., a wholesaler of flowers, grows some;roses, daisies and orchids and gets additional supplies of flowers from other;growers. In November 2009, FreshCut entered into a;written contract to sell Bloom ?1200 red roses at $2.60 each, delivery to be;made on February 11, 2010.? In January;2010, a tornado destroyed FreshCut?s fields of roses and she failed to make the;delivery on February 11, 2010. Bloom;forced to buy the roses elsewhere at a higher price, sued FreshCut for breach;of contract. Who will win? Discuss fully the;arguments of each party. (50 points)


Paper#59061 | Written in 18-Jul-2015

Price : $37