ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Consumer Protection, Parol Evidence Rule, Brooklyn Bridge

63 views4 pages

pearimpala756

30 May 2012

School

York University

Department

Administrative Studies

Course

ADMS 2610

Professor

Robert Levine

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Based upon the rule that once a contract is in writing, it is binding on the parties, it cannot be altered or varied. Outside forensic evidence cannot be used to alter or change the written contract. It is problematic in the case where it"s not agreed between parties. A and b are discussing that a is looking for a painter for his house. B says he can paint the house for . B says he will use the best quality paint. Contract reads: b will paint the house for . Under parole evidence rule , a will be in trouble. Ways to go around this parole evidence rule: argument is to use top quality paint. It is a condition precedent : a special type of condition, something that occurs when entered into agreement, but before the contract comes into existence. If condition is satisfied, it becomes crystal clear.

Related Questions

TRUE or FALSE

1.The UCC requires application of the "mirror image" rule in cases where contracts for the sale of goods are made by exchanging forms.

2.A contract generally comes into existence and becomes binding at the moment the parties have reached an agreement on all material provisions, although they may intend to later write down the terms of the agreement.

3.An acceptance must be in writing.

4.If an authorized means of acceptance is expressly present, any attempt by the offeror to accept by a non-authorized means is effective upon dispatch.

5.A bilateral contract is a promise for a promise.

6. If one or both parties to a form contract are non-merchants, the additional terms proposed by one of the parties are treated as:

	a.	revocation.
	b.	void.
	c.	expressly conditional.
	d.	proposals for addition to the contract.

7. Under the UCC Rule 2-207 for the sale of goods when a contract is made by the exchange of forms, when the acceptance form has terms additional to or different from the offer:

	a.	a contract can result but the differing terms may not be part of the contract.
	b.	no contract will result because the acceptance form will not be considered as a counter-offer.
	c.	a contract can result and the differing terms must be included as part of the contract.
	d.	no contract will result because the acceptance form will be considered as a counter-offer and thus an implicit rejection of the offer.

erineagle120

This is my debate topic from my foundation of business law class.

My group is talking about deontology and contracts:

Suppose Allison, a house painter, and Beth, a homeowner, enter into an agreement whereby Allison will paint Beth's house in exchange for Beth's payment of $5,000 upon satisfactory completion of the paint job. In the contract, the parties agree that "satisfactory completion" is to be determined solely by Beth. Allison completes the paint job according to objective industry standards. Beth is satisfied with the paint job but decides to tell Allison that she is not satisfied with the paint job. Beth wants to take a trip to Costa Rica, and she must pay in full for the trip in advance; she does not have enough money to pay Allison and to pay for the trip. Beth tells Allison that she will pay Allison $3,000 since she did paint the entire house, even though she is not satisfied with how it turned out.

Follow deontological theory to analyze Beth's approach.

Team 1- Argue in support of Beth's approach

Team 2- Argue in opposition to Beth's approach

My team is team 1. Could you give me some convincing reasons to support Beth's approach, which are strong enough to go against the other team?

Thank you very much!

purpleserval492

1. The Winklers were interested in purchasing a home in the Valleyview Farms housing development. They contracted the developer, Galehouse, and selected a lot that cost $57,000. They asked the developer to show them plans for houses for which the construction costs would range from $1800,000 to 190,000, indicating that this was the price they would be willing to spend on construction only and wasnât to include the lot price. The developer gave them several books and plans to look at. After the Winklers had several conversations with Galehouse, he drafted plans for a house and gave the Winklers a quote of $198,000 for the construction costs. The lot price was not included. After several weeks of negotiations, the parties agreed on a price of $291,000 for both the construction costs and the lot. Galehouse prepared a written contract to reflect the agreement of the parties, but he forgot to include the lot price. The final contract read âprice for $198,000.â The Winklers paid Galehouse $57,000, the lot price, as a down payment. When the construction was completed, and the Winklers were finalizing their loan from the bank, the parties discovered the error in the contract. The Winklerâs argued that the written contract indicated total costs of $198,000, and that is the total amount they should pay. Galehouse sued to have the contract reformed to reflect the full agreed upon price of $291,000. Should the contract be reformed? Why or why not? Fully explain your answer. 2. The Laths were the owners of a farm that they wished to sell. Mrs. Mitchell considered purchasing the land but found that a barn located across the road was objectionable. Mitchell argued that the Laths orally agreed to remove the barn in consideration of her promise to purchase the property, which she agreed to do for $8,400 in a written contract. The contract made no mention of the removal of the barn. After Mitchell moved into her new home and made several improvements to the land, the Laths never removed the barn and expressly communicated that they had no intentions of removing the barn. Mitchell sued the Laths for breach of contract. In whose favor do you think the court ruled? What effect does the parol evidence rule have on admissibility of oral agreements regarding the promise to remove the barn? Fully explain your answer. 3. Shirley and Vince Ladner leased 10 acres of their land to J.D. Pigg, who used the land for his cattle farm. The Landers and Pigg created a 10-year contract, providing that rent be paid annually on August 1. Pigg excuted the lease with his first payment of cash in August 2000. On August 1, 2001, Mrs. Pigg attempted to mail the check for the second rent payment but placed the wrong mailing address on the envelope. Consequently, the check was returned to her residence. Mrs. Pigg then properly forwarded the check to the Ladners. However, the Ladners did not receive the check until August 8, 2001, at which time they refused to accept the payment and returned the check to Pigg. The Ladners claimed that the lease had been terminated by Piggâs failure to submit payment in a timely manner, and this failure constituted a material breach of contract. Is Piggâs failure to tender payment on August 1 a material breach of the lease? Why or why not. Fully explain your answer.

rubygoose336

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Consumer Protection, Parol Evidence Rule, Brooklyn Bridge

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Precontract, Rescission

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 2: Rescission, Parol Evidence Rule, Precontract

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 2: Convenience Store, Collateral Contract, Contra Proferentem

Related Questions