I do not have a question
strudw
homework_help.docxPower point slides for terminology can also be found at or below: http://wps.prenhall.com/bp_cheeseman_blaw_8/225/57727/14778287.cw/index.html
http://wps.prenhall.com/bp_cheeseman_blaw_8/225/57727/14778328.cw/index.html
This is case#1:
Page 197, para 9.2. Bilateral or Unilateral Contract G.S. Adams Jr., vice president of the Washington Bank & Trust Co., met with Bruce Bickham. An agreement was reached whereby Bickham agreed to do his personal and corporate banking business with the bank, and the bank agreed to loan Bickham money at 7.5 percent interest per annum. Bickham would have ten years to repay the loans. For the next two years, the bank made several loans to Bickham at 7.5 percent interest. Adams then resigned from the bank. The bank notified Bickham that general economic changes made it necessary to charge a higher rate of interest on both outstanding and new loans. Bickham sued the bank for breach of contract. Was the contract a bilateral or unilateral contract?
Ref: Bickman v. Washington Bank & Trust Company, 515 So.2d 4576, 1987 La. App. Lexis 10442 (Court of Appeal of Louisiana)
References I found.
http://la.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19871014_0000876.LA.htm/qx
http://www.leagle.com/decision/1987972515So2d457_1919/BICKHAM%20v.%20WASHINGTON%20BANK%20&%20TRUST%20CO. (closing statement)
http://www.leagle.com/decision/1987972515So2d457_1919/BICKHAM%20v.%20WASHINGTON%20BANK%20&%20TRUST%20CO. (evidence)
http://www.leagle.com/decision/1987972515So2d457_1919/BICKHAM%20v.%20WASHINGTON%20BANK%20&%20TRUST%20CO. (testimony)
V. Answers to Business Law Cases
Bilateral or Unilateral Contract
9.1. The contract is a bilateral contract. A contract is bilateral if the offeror’s promise is answered with the offeree’s promise of acceptance. The court found that the agreement between Mr. Bickham and the bank on January 23, 1974, was a bilateral agreement. Bickham agreed to do his banking in return for the bank’s agreement to make loans at 7 1/2 percent. If Bickham had said “If you promise to loan me money at 7 1/2 percent, I will do all my banking with your bank,” the offer would have been to create a unilateral contract.
The court further held that bilateral contracts can only be altered with the consent of both parties and that the bank acted unilaterally in changing the interest rates on the loans. Therefore, the Appellate Court upheld the trial court’s ruling that the bank had breached its contract.
In addition, the court held that each of the subsequently executed notes were bilateral contracts. The court stated that although the agreement was silent at the time, it would impute a “reasonable time” into the agreement. Bickham v. Washington Bank & Trust Company, 515 So.2d 457 (La.App. 1987).
This is case #2: (it was first granted and then appealed)
9.3 Implied-in-Fact Contract. For six years, Lee Marvin, an actor, lived with Michelle Marvin. They were not married. At the end of six years, Lee Marvin compelled Michelle Marvin to leave his household. He continued to support her for another year but thereafter refused to provide further support. During their time together, Lee Marvin earned substantial income and acquired property, including motion-picture rights worth more than $1 million. Michelle Marvin brought an action against Lee Marvin, alleging that an implied-in-fact contract existed between them and that she was entitled to half of the property that they had acquired while living together. She claimed that she had given up a lucrative career as an entertainer and singer to be a full-time companion, homemaker, housekeeper, and cook. Can an implied-in-fact contract result from the conduct of unmarried persons who live together? Marvin v. Marvin, 18 Cal.2d 660 P.2d 106, 134 Cal. Rptr. 815, 1976 Cal. Lexis 377 (Supreme Court of California)
9.2. Yes, an implied in fact contract can result from the conduct of unmarried persons who live together. An implied in fact contract arises where (1) the plaintiff provided property or services to the defendant, (2) the plaintiff expected to be paid for the property or services, and did not provide the property or services gratuitously, and (3) the defendant was given an opportunity to reject the property or services, but failed to do so.
Here the plaintiff provided services while the defendant provided property. There is no more reason to presume that services are contributed as a gift. It is better to presume that the parties intended to deal fairly with each other. To hold otherwise would disproportionately enrich one partner at the expense of the other. Therefore, the court held that courts may inquire into the conduct of the parties to determine whether that conduct demonstrates an implied in fact contract. Marvin v. Marvin, 557 P.2d 106 (Cal. 1976).
Reference:
http://www.invispress.com/law/family/marvin.html
http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/122/871.html
http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2012&context=mulr
http://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/marvin-v-marvin-27965#FFN_2
http://mason.gmu.edu/~weitzman/marvinv.htm
Parts of a contract
· Offer
· Acceptance
· Consideration
· Implied contract
· Unwritten understanding
if someone “reasonably relies” on the promise of another by word or conduct, and is “justified in that reliance,” or the other will suffer a “detrimental reliance,” the agreement may be enforced. Conduct, not just words or promises, is a key point for evaluation
Here is the table of contents
· Introduction
· What both sides intend to prove
· Evidence that was presented
· Testimonies
· Comments and main points of the closing statement
· Conclusion VII. Terms
1. bilateral contract—A contract entered into by way of exchange of promises of the parties: a “promise for a promise.”
2. common law of contracts—Contract law developed primarily by state courts.
3. equity—A doctrine that permits judges to make decisions based on fairness, equality, moral rights, and natural law.
4. • executed contract—A contract that has been fully performed on both sides: a completed contract.
5. executory contract—A contract that has not been fully performed. With court approval, executory contracts may be rejected by a debtor in bankruptcy.
6. express contract—An agreement that is expressed in written or oral words.
7. formal contract—A contract that requires a special form or method of creation.
8. implied-in-fact contract—A contract where agreement between parties has been inferred from their conduct.
9. informal contract—A contract that is not formal. Valid informal contracts are fully enforceable and may be sued upon if breached.
10. legally enforceable contract—If one party fails to perform as promised, the other party can use the court system to enforce the contract and recover damages or other remedy.
11. objective theory of contracts—A theory that says the intent to contract is judged by the reasonable person standard and not by the subjective intent of the parties.
12. offeree—The party to whom an offer to enter into a contract is made.
13. offeror—The party who makes an offer to enter into a contract.
14. quasi- or implied-in-law contract—An equitable doctrine whereby a court may award monetary damages to a plaintiff for providing work or services to a defendant even though no actual contract existed. The doctrine is intended to prevent unjust enrichment and unjust detriment.
15. Restatement of the Law of Contracts—A compilation of model contract law principles drafted by legal scholars. The Restatement is not law.
16. unenforceable contract—A contract where the essential elements to create a valid contract are met, but there is some legal defense to the enforcement of the contract.
17. Uniform Commercial Code—Comprehensive statutory scheme that includes laws that cover most aspects of commercial transactions.
18. unilateral contract—A contract in which the offeror’s offer can be accepted only by the performance of an act by the offeree: a “promise for an act.”
19. valid contract—A contract that meets all of the essential elements to establish a contract: a contract that is enforceable by at least one of the parties.
20. void contract—A contract that has no legal effect: a nullity.
21. voidable contract—A contract where one or both parties have the option to avoid their contractual obligations. If a contract is avoided, both parties are released from their contractual obligations.
Must have a complaint and summons – this is a template. Make sure we use the right court and lawyers.
In the United States District Court for the District of Idaho
John Doe Civil No. 2-1001
Plaintiff
v. COMPLAINT
Jane Rice
Defendant
The plaintiff, by and through his attorney, alleges
The plaintiff a resident of the State of Idaho, the defendant is a resident of the State of Washington, and there is diversity of citizenship between the parties.
The amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000 exclusive of interest and cost.
On January 10, 2016, plaintiff was exercising reasonable care while walking across the intersection of Sun Valley Road and Main Street, Ketchum, Idaho when defendant negligently drove her car through a red light at the intersection and struck plaintiff
As a result of the defendant’s negligence, plaintiff has incurred medical expenses of $104,000 and suffered severe physical injury and mental distress.
WHERFORE plaintiff claims judgment in the amount of $1000, 000 interest at the maximum legal rate, and costs of this action.
By _____________________
Edward Lawson
Attorney for Plaintiff
100 Main Street
Ketchum, Idaho
