Business Law - ORIGINAL WORK (PLAGIARISM FREE) - DUE TONIGHT AT 7PM EST

QUESTIONS: AFTER READING ATTACHED DOCUMENT (Paragraph 1.1)

1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract?

2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract?

3. Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 (above)?

4. What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract?

5. Could BTT avoid this contract under the doctrine of mistake? Explain. Would either party have any other defenses that would allow the contract to be avoided?

6. Assuming, arguendo, that this e-mail does constitute an agreement, what consideration supports this agreement?

Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario (paragraph 1.1) in the attachment, and complete the following in your response:

·         At the end of the scenario, BTT states that it is not interested in distributing Chou’s new strategy game, Strat. Assuming BTT and Chou have a contract, and BTT has breached the contract by not distributing the game, discuss what remedies might or might not apply.

·         Explain your answers and refer to attachment (entire Paragraph 2.1) for support.