이하의 계약법 outline은 본인이 작성한 것이 아닙니다. 인터넷상에서 쉽게 구할 수 있는 것입니다. 이하의 아웃라인은 특히 New York Bar Exam을 준비하시는 분들께 도움이 될 수 있습니다.
Contracts:
a)
Vocabulary:
i)
Contract – agreement plus.
(1) Express contract – find agreement from
words of parties.
(2) Implied contract – parties act as though
there is a contract.
ii)
Quasi-contract – an equitable remedy:
(1) Need not apply contract rules.
(2) Applies when strict application of contract law seems unjust.
(3)
Elements:
(a) P has conferred a benefit
on D; and
(b) P reasonably expected to be
paid; and
(c)
D realized
unjust enrichment if P is not compensated.
(4) Measure of recovery:
(a) Contract price is not the measure of recovery.
(b) The contract price is a ceiling if P is in default or contract
recovery is barred by the Statute of Frauds.
iii)
Bilateral contract – results from an offer that is open as to the method of acceptance.
iv)
Unilateral contract – results from an offer that expressly requires performance as the only possible method of acceptance.
(1) A contract is bilateral unless:
(a) Reward, prize, contest; or
(b) Offer expressly requires performance for acceptance.
b)
Applicable Law:
i)
Common law – applies to services contracts, real estate, and others not covered
by UCC.
ii)
Articles 1 and 2 of the
UCC – apply to contracts that are primarily sales
of goods (tangible personal property).
(1) Mixed deal – UCC applies to contracts that include both
the sale of goods and services if the goods are the more important part of the
deal (if service is more important part of the deal, then the common law
applies).
(a) exception – if the contract divides payment, then the
UCC applies to the goods part and common law to the services part.
iii) Article
2A of the UCC (only on NY bar) – applies to leases of goods (not
leases of real property).
c)
Formation of Contracts:
i)
Offers:
(1) general test:
manifestation of commitment - an offer is
a manifestation of an intention to contract.
(a) The basic test: whether a reasonable person in the position of the offeree would
believe that his or her assent creates a contract.
(2) Content:
(a) general rule – an offer does not have to contain all
material terms.
(i)
Missing price term in sales contract:
1.
Land Sale Contract (C/L) – price
and description required (if missing, not an offer).
2.
Sale of Goods (UCC) – Quantity required; no price
requirement. (offer if parties so intend).
a. If the price is left to be agreed upon by the parties and they fail to
agree, the court will supply a reasonable price at the time of delivery.
(ii) Vague or ambiguous material terms:
1.
under common law and UCC - an offer using vague or ambiguous material terms is not an offer
(e.g. – “I’ll sell you my car for a fair price”).
(iii) Requirements
contracts/output contracts:
1.
A contract for the sale of
goods can state the quantity of goods to be delivered under the contract in terms of the buyer’s requirements or the
seller’s output or in terms of exclusivity.
2.
Requirement contract is NOT illusory because the UCC imposes a duty to purchase requirements in good faith
3. Limitation:
No unreasonably disproportionate increases – buyer can increase requirements so long as the increase is in line
with prior demands.
(3) Context:
(a) General rules:
(i)
Price quotation is not an offer.
(ii) An advertisement is not an offer.
(b) Exceptions:
(i)
Price quotation can be an offer if it is in response to a specific inquiry.
(ii) An advertisement can be an offer if it is in
the nature of a reward.
(iii) An advertisement can be an offer if it is specific as to quantity and expressly indicates who can accept
(e.g. – “1 widget available, first come first serve”).
ii)
Termination of offers:
(1) An offer cannot be accepted if it has terminated (it is “dead”).
(2) Methods of termination:
(a) Lapse of time – an offer that has not been accepted within the time stated for
acceptance or within a reasonable time is considered terminated.
(b) Words or
conduct of offeror – an offer can be revoked
by either:
(i)
an unambiguous statement by offeror to offeree of unwillingness or inability to
contract; OR
(ii) unambiguous conduct by
offeror indicating an unwillingness or inability to contract that offeree is aware of.
1.
example 1 – (awareness). I offer to sell my car to S for $400, the next day I sell my car to C
(offer not terminated b/c S is not aware of the sale to C, thus S still
has power to accept).
2.
example 2 – (awareness). I offer to sell my car to S for $400, the next day S sees C driving my
car and learns from him that he has bought it (offer has been terminated b/c S
knows of sale to C before accepting).
3.
example 3 – (Double Offer Only). I offer to sell my car to S for $400 and then offer to sell my car to
C, even if S learns of the offer to C, the offer to S is not terminated (the
offer to C does not demonstrate an unwillingness to sell to S).
(iii) Revocation of an offer:
1.
Revocation of an offer sent by mail is not effective
until received.
2.
An offer cannot be revoked after it has been
accepted.
3.
Offers that cannot be revoked:
a.
C/L Option Contract: An offer cannot be revoked if the offeror has promised to keep the
offer open, and this promise is supported by consideration (“option”).
b.
UCC Art. 2 Firm Offer – an offer cannot be revoked for up to three months if:
i.
offer to buy or sell goods,
ii.
signed, written promise to keep the offer open, and
iii.
party is a merchant (person in business).
1. If writing promises to keep offer open for longer than 3 months, the merchant can still revoke after 3 months.
2.
If writing does not state a time period, the merchant can’t revoke for a reasonable time fixed by
the court (up to 3 months).
c. Firm
offers in NY – in contracts other then sale of goods contracts (like C/L K), an offer that states in writing that it will be
held open is irrevocable for stated time or a
reasonable time.
i. No
signature requirement.
ii. No
time limit.
iii.
In general, NY gives greater significance to the existence
of writing.
d.
An offer cannot be revoked if there has been detrimental reliance by the offeree
that is reasonably foreseeable (e.g.
– General Contractor and
Subcontractor bidding situation - subcontractor cannot revoke his bid when a
general contractor who is bidding on an contract relies on that bid).
e.
The start of performance pursuant to an offer to enter into a unilateral contract makes that offer irrevocable for
a reasonable time to complete performance.
i.
Requires start of performance not just mere preparation (though if mere preparation, offer could be irrevocable under detrimental reliance above if
preparation was reasonably foreseeable).
ii. NY distinction – start of
performance does NOT make offer irrevocable (i.e., you can still revoke your offer).
(c)
Words or conduct of the offeree - Rejection:
(i)
Counteroffer – terminates the offer and becomes a new offer.
1.
“Will you take $100?” does not constitute a
counteroffer.
(ii) Conditional acceptance – operates
the same way as a counteroffer (look for phrases such as “if,” “so long as,”
“provided,” and “on condition that.”
(iii) Additional terms to a common law contract (“mirror image” rule) – an “acceptance” that adds new terms is treated like a counteroffer
rather than an acceptance.
(iv) Additional
terms under UCC article 2 – a response
to an offer that adds new terms (but does not make the new terms a condition of
acceptance) is generally treated as an acceptance.
1.
Is the additional term part of the contract?
a.
If both parties are
merchants – the general rule is that the additional term is a part of the contract.
i.
Exceptions – the additional terms
are not part of the contract if:
1. it materially
changes the offer; or
2. the
original offeror objects to the change.
b.
If one or both parties is not a merchant – the additional term is merely
a proposal that is to be separately accepted or rejected.
(d) Death of a party prior to acceptance:
(i)
General rule – death or incapacity of either party terminates the offer.
1.
exceptions:
a.
option contracts;
b.
part performance of offer to enter into a unilateral contract.
iii)
Acceptance of an offer:
(1) Who can accept? – generally, an offer can
only be accepted by a person who knows
about the offer who is the person to whom it was made (offers cannot be assigned; vs. options can be assigned unless
option expressly provides otherwise).
(2)
Methods of accepting an offer (6 fact patterns):
(a) If offeree
performs – the
only question is whether Notice of performance is required. This answer turns on
whether offeree has reason to believe that offeror will not learn of the
acceptance and whether the offer dispenses with notice.
(b) If the offeree
starts to perform in bilateral contract situation – start of performance is acceptance
of an offer to enter into a bilateral contract but is not acceptance of an
offer to enter into a unilateral contract.
(i)
Cf. Unilateral
contract – completion of performance is required to constitute acceptance.
(c)
If the offeree promises to perform – most offers can be accepted by a promise to perform (not offers
that expressly require performance for acceptance and reward offers).
(d) Acceptance
under Mailbox Rule - If the offeror and the
offeree are at different places and there are conflicting communications – Acceptance
by mail creates a contract at the moment of posting, unless the offer stipulates that acceptance is not effective
until received, or an option contract is involved
(i)
IF C mails an acceptance letter and then the offer is revoked before the
letter arrives, the acceptance is valid.
1.
Rejection and acceptance exception – if C mails a rejection letter but changes his mind and then mails
an acceptance letter, whichever arrives
first will be effective.
(e)
If seller sends the wrong goods –
general rule is that the seller accepted the buyer’s offer but breached the
contract.
(i)
Accommodation exception – if the
shipment of nonconforming goods includes a note saying the shipment is offered
merely as an accommodation, it is viewed
as a counteroffer and not a breach (buyer
can accept or reject the shipment with no other remedy).
(f)
If the offeree
is silent – generally, silence is not acceptance.
(i)
Exception – if offeree by words or conduct agrees that silence is acceptance,
then silence is acceptance.
iv)
Formation (Second view):
(1) Some agreements are not legally enforceable. Legal reasons for not enforcing an agreement include: [MAD FIFFF]
(a) (1) lack of consideration
or a consideration substitute for the promise at issue;
(b) (2) lack of capacity of the
person who made that promise;
(c)
(3) statute
of frauds;
(d) (4) illegality - existing laws that
prohibit the performance of the agreement;
(e)
(5) Fraud/misrepresentations;
(f)
(6) duress;
(g)
(7) unconscionability;
(h) (8) ambiguity in words of
agreement; and
(i)
(9) mistakes
at the time of the agreement as to the material facts affecting the agreement.
v)
Consideration or a Consideration Substitute:
(1)
Consideration – bargained for legal detriment to promisee (NY – also bargained for benefit to promissor).
(a) Legal
Detriment:
(i)
Performance (doing something not legally
obligated to do);
(ii) Forbearance (not doing something legally entitled to do);
(iii) promise to perform;
(iv) promise to forbear.
(b) “Bargained for”
(i)
VS. Conditional gift – there is no consideration when you say to a homeless man, “If you
go around to the clothing shop there, you may purchase an overcoat on my
credit.” (this is a conditional gift b/c going around the corner is necessary
to get coat).
(c)
Illusory promises – an illusory promise is one where the promissor has not committed
herself in any manner and is not consideration.
(i)
example 1 - E agrees to sell his
car to C unless C changes his mind. E is not legally obligated to sell his car to C b/c there is
no consideration for E’s promise b/c C’s promise was illusory.
(ii) Cf., example
2 – same facts, except C promises to buy the
car on December 7th unless he notifies E by December 6th
that he has changed his mind.
There is consideration for E’s promise b/c C must give notice by the 6th
(obligation he didn’t have before).
(d) The adequacy of
consideration is not relevant in contract law.
(e)
Past consideration:
(i)
General rule – what you already have
done is not a consideration (e.g. – A saves L’s life. H is so grateful that he promises to
pay A $3,000. H later changes his
mind – promise is not legally enforceable).
1.
exception – past consideration was expressly requested and there was an
expectation of payment. (e.g. – H sees L in danger and asks A to save her,
knowing that A would expect to be paid.
After A saves L, H promises to pay A $3,000 – legally enforceable).
2.
NY exception – past consideration is good consideration if the promissor makes the promise in a
signed writing that acknowledges the consideration (c.f., NY Option Contracts –
don’t need signature).
(f)
Preexisting duty rule:
(i)
Common law – re: Modification
1.
General rule – doing what you were already legally obligated to do is not
consideration. So if you want the
modification of an existing contract, then you need new consideration.
a.
e.g. - the Boss contracts to
perform for 15k; he refuses to sing unless paid 20k. promoter promises to pay 20; B performs; Promoter only pays
B 15k; the promise to pay the additional 5k is not legally enforceable (no additional
consideration).
2.
Exceptions:
a.
Addition to or change in performance to both parties - any slight change will
do; B promises to play an additional song in exchange for the extra 5k.
b.
Unforeseen difficulty so severe as to excuse performance (impracticability grounds) – the sound
system at the arena is inoperative but B promises to play anyway for additional
5k.
c.
**3rd Party promise
to pay – no existing legal duty to third party; M, a
loyal fan, promises to pay the additional 5k (enforceable because no existing
legal duty to M.
d. NY
exception – Written modification is enough for the consideration.
(ii) UCC Article 2:
1.
no pre-existing legal duty rule – good faith is the test for modification.
a.
Example - S contracts to sell grits to B for $1,000. S subsequently tells B that it cannot
deliver the grits for less than $1,300.
B promises to pay the additional $300. S delivers. B
is obligated to pay the additional $300 as
long as S was acting in good faith.
(g)
Part payment as consideration for release (promise to forgive balance of debt):
(i)
If debt is due and undisputed – part payment is NOT consideration
for release.
(ii) If debt is not yet due OR is disputed – part payment is consideration for release.
(iii) NY
exception – Written
release of any debt, part payment or no payment, is effective.
(h) Consideration substitutes:
(i)
C/L - A written promise to satisfy an obligation for which there is a legal defense is
enforceable without consideration (as a consideration substitute).
1.
e.g. – D owes C $1000 but C’s claim to collect the debt is barred by the
SOL. D writes C, “I know that I
owe you $1000. I will pay you
$600.” C can collect on the Only $600 promised.
(ii) UCC
- A written release of all or part of a claim for breach of contract for
sale of goods is enforceable without consideration.
(iii) Written
Release – a release that will serve to discharge contractual duties is usually
required to be in writing and supported by new consideration or promissory
estoppel elements.
(iv) Promissory
estoppel (called detrimental reliance in NY) – most important consideration substitute.
1.
Exam tip: on multiple choices, first look for
consideration, and only if there is none look for promissory estoppel.
2.
Elements:
a.
promise;
b.
reliance on that promise which is reasonable, detrimental and
foreseeable; and
c.
Enforcement is necessary to avoid injustice.
vi)
Defendant/Promissor’s Lack of Capacity:
(1) Who lacks capacity?
(a) an infant (under 18);
(b) mental incompetents (lack ability to understand agreement);
(c)
* intoxicated persons (if other party had
reason to know).
(2) Consequences of incapacity:
(a) The person without
capacity has a right to disaffirm the contract
(other party cannot invalidate party, only incapacitated person can).
(b) Implied affirmation –by retaining the benefits of the contract
after gaining capacity.
(c)
Liability for necessaries – a person who does not have capacity is legally obligated to pay for
things that are necessary such as food, clothing, medical care or shelter.
(i)
This liability is based on quasi-contract law, not on contract law (thus other party
can ONLY recover the value of the benefit conferred, NEVER the contract price).
vii)
Statute of Frauds Defense:
(1) Contracts within the Statute of Frauds:
(a) Promise in consideration of marriage (not promise to marry).
(b) Promise by executor or administrator to pay obligation of estate from
his own funds (not from estate funds).
(c)
Promises to answer for (guarantee) debts of
another.
(i)
Not a promise to pay, but a promise to pay if someone else does not.
(ii) Main purpose
exception – if purpose of underlying obligation was to
benefit guarantor (SOF does not apply).
1.
e.g. - S sells P paint on credit.
S claims that O promised to pay for the paint if P did not pay. P’s purpose in (reason for) buying the
paint was to paint O’s house.
2.
NY distinction – main purpose exception requires independent
duty of payment (if guarantor would have been legally obligated to pay
anyway).
(d) Service contract not capable of being performed within a year from the
time of the contract.
(i)
Examples:
1.
Employment contract for 3 years (within SOF).
2.
Employment contract for 3
years that can be terminated on 30 days
notice (still within SOF).
3.
Employment contract for a year beginning next
month (within SOF b/c can’t finish performance within year of contract date).
4.
** Contracts to perform tasks (NOT within SOF b/c in theory with
unlimited resources, any task could be completed within the year).
a.
It doesn’t matter if in reality the task was
not completed within a year (it was still capable of being completed within the
year and thus is not within SOF).
5.
Contracts for life (not within the SOF
regardless of health, etc.).
6. NY: K’s for life are within SOF in NY.
(e)
Transfers of interest in real estate of a term
for more than one year.
(i)
Includes sales, leases, easements, etc. (not
building house b/c not transfer of interest).
(f)
Sale of goods for $500 or more.
(g)
For NY exam only:
(i)
Leases of goods (UCC 2A) with the
payments totaling $1,000 or more.
(ii) Contract to
assign insurance policy or name beneficiary.
(iii) Contract to pay
finder’s fee or broker’s fee to person other than a licensed broker or a lawyer
or auctioneer.
(2) 2 methods to Satisfy the SOF – Actual
Performance, Writing, or Judicial Admission
(a) Performance:
Full Performance vs. Part Performance
(i)
Service contracts – ONLY full performance by either party satisfies the
SOF.
1.
Part performance does NOT satisfy the SOF (thus no remedy under contract law, though possible remedy as a
quasi-contract).
(ii) Sale of goods:
oral agreement + part performance
1.
Ordinary goods – Part performance of a contract for the sale of goods satisfies the SOF but only to the extent of part performance
a.
효과: Seller can sue for payment for goods delivered, but buyer can’t sue
compelling delivery of remaining goods.
2.
Specially manufactured goods – SOF
is satisfied as soon as the seller has
begun substantially to perform (enough work
to know that the goods were specially manufactured).
(iii) Real estate transfer contract:
1.
Full payment by the buyer of real estate does NOT satisfy the SOF.
2.
Part performance by buyer of real estate can
satisfy the SOF if any 2 of the
following 3 are satisfied: (i) payment, (ii) possession, and/or (iii)
improvements.
a.
e.g. – B orally agrees to buy Blackacre from S for $10,000. B takes possession
of Blackacre and pays $2,000 (SOF satisfied
b/c part payment and possession).
(b) Writing:
(i)
Common Law SOF – all the material terms
(the who and the what) of the contract must be in writing(s), and it must be
signed by the D.
(ii) UCC SOF – same as above but writing must also include
the quantity term.
1.
**“answer the damn letter” exception – does away with signature
requirement if (i)
both parties are merchants and (ii) the person who
receives a signed writing with a quantity term that claims there is a contract (iii) fails to
respond within 10 days of receipt.
(iii) NY. UCC 2A: leases of personal property – writing must
indicate that (i) it is a lease, (ii) describe what is being leased, and (iii) state the duration of the lease.
(c)
Judicial Admission of sale
of goods agreement – a statement in pleadings, discovery or
testimony that there was an agreement.
(3) Related Issues:
(a) Authorization to enter into a contract for someone else – the authorization to enter into a contract for someone else must be
in writing if the contract to be signed is within the SOF (“equal dignity” rule).
(b) Contract modification:
(i)
When law requires a writing to modify – If the deal with the alleged change would be within the SOF, then
the alleged modification agreement must be in writing.
(ii) when contract requires a
writing to modify:
1.
Common law – contract provisions
requiring that all modification be in writing are ignored.
2.
UCC – contract provisions requiring written
modifications are effective unless
waived.
viii)
Illegality, Misrepresentation, Duress:
(1) Illegal subject matter/Illegal purpose:
(a) Illegal subject matter – a contract
to do something illegal is void.
(b) Illegal purpose – a contract to do
something that is legal but in furtherance of an illegal purpose is not void
(and is enforceable, but only by a
person who did not know of the illegal purpose).
(2) Misrepresentation:
(a) A misrepresentation is a false assertion of fact or a concealment of
facts.
(i)
A misrepresentation as to the terms of the contract (e.g. – this house has no termites)
makes the agreement voidable if the misrepresentation is (i) fraudulent or material (contract
misrepresentation, unlike tort, does not
require fraud) and the misrepresentation (ii) induced the making of the contract.
1.
A misrepresentation as to the nature of a contract (e.g. – this is just a lease when it
is actually a purchase agreement) is void
(it cannot be enforced).
(ii) Remedy – rescission.
(3) Duress:
(a) Elements:
(i)
improper threat;
(ii) no reasonable alternative
ix)
Unconscionability:
(1) Empowers a court to refuse to enforce all or part of an agreement if
there was unfair surprise or oppressive terms as tested at the
time the agreement was made.
(2) Under 2A, a court may grant
relief from a consumer lease even though no provision of the lease is
unconscionable, if there is unconscionable
conduct in inducing or enforcing the lease.
x)
Ambiguity in words of agreement:
(1)
There will be no contract if:
(a) Parties use a material
term that is open to at least 2 reasonable interpretations;
(b) Each party attaches a
different meaning to the term; AND
(c)
Neither party knows or has reason to know the term is open to at least
2 reasonable interpretations.
(i)
If 1 party did know that the term was open to
2 reasonable interpretations, the contract will be enforced under the terms as understood by the other party
xi)
Mistake of Fact:
(1) Mutual mistake of material fact:
(a) There will be no contract
if:
(i)
both parties were mistaken,
(ii) as
to a basic
assumption of fact, which
(iii) materially affects the
agreed exchange.
(b) Key is whether the agreed upon subject matter exists.
(i)
Mutual mistake as to what
something is – the agreement is not legally enforceable.
(ii) Mutual mistake as to what something is worth – the agreement is still legally enforceable.
(2) Unilateral mistake of material fact:
(a) General rule – courts are reluctant to
allow a party to avoid a contract for a mistake made by only one party.
(i)
Exceptions:
1.
“Palpable” mistakes – if the other party to the contract knows or should have known of
the mistake, courts grant relief to the mistaken party.
2.
Mistakes discovered before significant reliance by the other party.
d)
Terms of Contract:
i)
The parol evidence rule:
(1) Vocabulary:
(a) Integration – written agreement that court finds is the
final agreement (triggers parol evidence rule).
(b) Partial integration – written and
final, but not complete.
(c)
Complete integration – written and final and complete.
(d) Merger clause – contract clause such as
“This is the complete and final agreement.”
(2) Rule: where the parties to a contract express their
agreement in a writing with the intent that it embody the full and final
expression of their bargain, any other expression (written or oral) made prior
to the writing, as well as any oral expression contemporaneous with the
writing, are inadmissible to vary the terms of the writing.
(3) Triggering facts:
(a) Written contract that the
court finds is the final agreement, and
(b) Oral statement made at the
time the contract was signed or earlier oral or written statements by the
parties to the contract.
(4) Parol evidence fact patterns
(a) Changing the written deal – regardless of whether
the writing is a complete or partial integration, the parol evidence prevents a
court from considering earlier
agreements as a source of terms that are inconsistent with the terms of the written contract.
(b) Mistake
Exception - The court may, however, consider evidence of such terms for the limited purpose of determining
whether there was a mistake in
integration (a mistake in reducing the agreement to writing).
(c)
Misrepresentation, Fraud, Duress Exception - Establishing a defense to the enforcement of the written deal - regardless of whether the writing is a complete or partial
integration, the parol evidence rule does not
prevent a court from considering earlier
words of the parties for the limited
purpose of determining whether there is a defense to the enforcement of the
agreement such as misrepresentation, fraud,
duress (not asking the court to change the deal, asking the court to
cancel it).
(d) Ambiguity
Exception - Explaining terms in a written deal – earlier
agreements can be considered to resolve ambiguities in the written contract
(e.g. – what the word “chicken” means).
(e)
Adding to the written deal – the parol
evidence rule prevents the court
from considering earlier agreements as a source of consistent, additional terms
unless the court finds the written agreement was only a partial
integration.
(f)
Partial Integration Exception – e.g., S contracts in
writing to sell B chickens. The
written contract does not specify how the chickens are to be packaged and
wrapped. The court can consider
evidence of earlier agreements between S and B as to how the chickens are to be
packaged and wrapped if it
determines the written agreement was only
a partial integration.
(g)
“naturally and normally” exception – even if the writing is a complete integration a court can still
consider evidence of earlier
agreements for terms that would naturally
be in a separate agreement.
(h) Modification exception – the parol evidence rule does not
apply to subsequent oral agreement
(i)
Rescission Exception –
the prol evidence rule
would not prevent introduction of the rescission.
1.
Rescission - A contract may be discharged by an express agreement between the
parties to rescind; the agreement to rescind is itself a binding contract
ii)
Parol Evidence Rule “Conduct, course of
performance, and custom and usage” Exception:
(1) The words of the parties are not the only source of contract
terms. Courts look first to course
of performance, then course of dealing, then custom and usage to explain words
in contracts or to fill gaps in contracts:
(a) Hierarchy:
(i)
Course of performance – same people, same contract.
1.
example – S contracts to sell 1,000 chickens a month to B for 12 months. The first three shipments are boiling
hens, and B does not complain.
(ii) Course of
dealing – same people, different but similar contracts.
1.
example – S contracts to sell 1,000 chickens a month to B for 12 months. Under prior chicken contracts, S sent B
boiling hens, and B complained.
(iii) Custom and
usage – different but similar people, different but similar contract.
1.
example - S contracts to sell 1,000 chickens a month to B for 12 months. It is customary in the chicken industry
to use the word “chicken” when the deal covers chickens up to six pounds.
iii)
UCC terms:
(1) Delivery obligations of seller of goods:
(a) No place of delivery has been agreed upon – absent an agreement as to place of delivery, the place of agreement is the seller’s place of business unless
both parties know that the goods are some place else in which case that place
is the place of delivery.
(b) Place of delivery by a common carrier has been agreed upon – if there is an agreement as to the place of delivery by a common
carrier, then the question is what does the seller have to do to complete its
delivery obligation.
(i)
If shipment contract – seller
completes its delivery obligation when:
1.
it gets the goods to a common carrier;
2.
Makes reasonable arrangements for delivery; and
3.
Notifies the buyer.
(ii) If destination
contract – the seller does not complete its delivery
obligation until the goods arrived where the buyer is.
(iii) Determining whether contract is a shipment or destination contract:
1.
If contract says “FOB –
[seller’s city]” – shipment contract.
2.
If contract says “FOB –
[buyer’s city]” – destination contract.
(2) Risk of loss:
(a) Risk of loss issues arise where (i) after the contract has been formed
but before the buyer receives the goods (ii) the goods are damaged or destroyed
and (iii) neither the buyer nor the seller is to blame.
(i)
If the risk of loss is on
the buyer – he has to pay the full contract price for the
lost or damaged goods.
(ii) If the risk of loss is on the seller – no
obligation on the buyer’s part (and possible liability on the seller for
non-delivery).
(b) 4 Rules for risk of loss
(a hierarchy):
(i)
Agreement of the parties controls.
(ii) If no agreement, look for
an unrelated breach (breaching party has risk of loss).
1.
e.g. – S contracts with B for coffee. Coffee is destroyed by rats (through no fault of either
party). S was already 2 weeks late
in delivering the coffee before it was destroyed. S has risk of loss.
(iii) Delivery by
common carrier other than seller – risk of
loss shifts from seller to buyer at the time that the seller completes his
delivery obligations (what constitutes completion depends on whether it is a
shipment or destination contract).
(iv) No agreement, no breach,
no delivery by a carrier:
1.
The determining factor is whether the “SELLER
IS A MERCHANT” (whether the buyer is a merchant is
irrelevant)
a.
IF
Merchant Seller – shifts from a merchant-seller to a buyer on
the buyer’s receipt of the goods (taking physical possession).
b.
IF
Nonmerchant Seller – shifts from a nonmerchant-seller to a buyer when he tenders the goods OR makes the goods available.
(c)
2A lease of personal
property – generally, risk of loss is on the lessor.
(i)
exception – finance leases (the risk is on the lessee).
(3) Warranties of quality:
(a) Express warranty:
(i)
Words – look for words that promise, describe or state facts (distinguish
from sales talk).
1.
Exam tip – look for parol evidence
issues (S made statement about quality but K does not include these terms).
(ii) Use of sample or model – creates an express
warranty that the goods the buyer receives will be like sample or model.
(b) Implied warranty of merchantability:
(i)
When any person buys any goods from any
merchant, a term is automatically added
to the contract by operation of law--that the goods are fit for the ordinary purpose for which
such goods are used.
1.
triggering fact – S is a merchant (which for this purpose means that he deals
in goods of that kind).
2.
warranty – goods are fit for ordinary purposes.
(c)
Implied warranty of fitness for a particular
purpose:
(i)
triggering facts – buyer has a particular purpose; buyer is relying on seller to
select suitable goods; and seller has reason to know of the purpose and
reliance.
(ii) Warranty – goods fit for a particular purpose.
(d) 2A warranties on leases:
(i)
general rule – lessor of personal property makes the same warranties as a
seller: express, merchantability,
fitness.
(ii) finance leases – in a "finance lease", warranties made by supplier to
lessor are enforceable by lessee (can only
enforce against seller, not against bank – so, you can’t stop
making lease payment to bank b/c of defect).
(4) Contractual limitations on warranty liability:
(a) Disclaimer (e.g. – “there are no warranties”) – eliminates implied warranties.
(i)
Express warranties (words or showing
model/sample) cannot be disclaimed.
(ii) Implied warranties of merchantability and fitness can be disclaimed (with words like: “as is,” “with all faults,” or
conspicuous language of disclaimer mentioning merchantability).
(b) Limitation of
remedies (e.g. – “warranty liability shall be limited
to replacement parts” – does not eliminate warranty, simply limits
or sets recovery for any breach of warranty.
(i)
Possible to limit remedies, even for express
warranties.
(ii) General test is Unconscionability.
(iii) Prima facie unconscionable if limitation of warranty on consumer goods does not allow for recovery for personal injury.
e)
Performance:
i)
Sale of goods performance concepts:
(1) Goods related concepts – perfect tender; cure; accept; reject; revocation
(a) Perfect tender – is the general standard
of Article 2. Subject to limited
exceptions, the seller is obligated to deliver perfect goods.
(b) Cure - In some instances, a seller who fails to
make a perfect tender will be given a "second chance," an option of
curing. Note that every seller
does not have the opportunity to "cure," and that the buyer cannot
compel the seller to cure.
(i)
Before the time for performance – there is a right to
cure.
(ii) After the time for performance - In very
limited situations, a seller has the option of curing even after the contract
delivery date.
1.
Statutory test - whether the seller has reasonable
grounds for believing that the improper
tender would be acceptable, perhaps with a money allowance (look for
information in the question about prior
deals between that buyer and seller with such an allowance).
(c)
Rejection of the goods:
(i)
Effect – if goods are non-conforming,
buyer’s rejection of the goods has
the effect of creating a breach in the
contract so there can be a lawsuit.
(ii) When is buyer entitled
to reject
the goods?
1.
Rejection of the goods must occur before acceptance of the goods.
a.
If the goods are less than perfect, the buyer has the option to reject unless it is an installment sales contract.
b.
Installment sale contracts – a contract
that requires or authorizes
1) delivery in separate lots 2) to
be accepted separately.
i.
When
can reject? - Buyer has a right to reject an installment ONLY where there is a
substantial impairment in that installment that can’t be cured.
(d) Acceptance of the goods:
(i)
When is there acceptance?
1.
Express acceptance.
2.
Implied acceptance – retention
after opportunity for inspection without objection is acceptance
a.
Exam Tip: bar exam rule
of thumb: if buyer had goods for more than a month without complaint –
acceptance
3.
NOTE. Inspection – Payment without opportunity to inspect is not treated as acceptance.
(ii) Effect of acceptance:
1.
If the buyer accepts the
goods, he cannot later reject them.
(e)
Revocation of acceptance of the goods In limited circumstances:
(i)
Requirements
1.
nonconformity substantially impairs the
value of the goods, and
2.
excusable ignorance of grounds
for revocation or reasonable reliance
on seller's assurance of satisfaction, and
3.
revocation within a reasonable time after discovery of nonconformity
(ii) e.g. - In July, B buys a sleeping bag from S insulated for temperatures as
low as 10 degrees. B uses the
sleeping bag for various warm weather camping adventures throughout the
summer. When B goes camping in October,
she learns that the sleeping bag is not insulated for temperatures as low as 10
degrees. B can revoke her
acceptance of the goods.
(2) Payment: cash; check;
(a) Payment is in cash unless otherwise agreed upon.
(b) Buyer can pay by check.
(c)
Seller does not have to take the check but
that gives the buyer an additional reasonable time.
ii)
Conditions of performance:
(1) What is an express performance condition?
(a) A condition is a mutually agreed upon promise modifier.
(i)
true condition – an event beyond the influence of either of the parties to the
contract that affects the duty to perform.
(ii) Covenant (duty/promise) – is not a
condition.
(iii) a condition coupled with a covenant – an
event that is to some extent within the influence of one of the parties to the
contract that affects the duty to perform.
(iv) Condition coupled with an implied covenant – where the conditioned event is subject to the efforts of one of the
parties to the contract, then the law implies
a promise to use reasonable efforts (if party doesn’t make reasonable
effort there is a breach of the contract).
1.
e.g.- B contracts to buy H’s house.
The contract provides in part “This sale is conditioned on B’s obtaining
an 8% mortgage.”
a.
If B makes reasonable efforts to obtain the
mortgage, but cannot – no contract.
b.
If B does not make reasonable efforts to
obtain the mortgage – breach of contract.
(2) How can you identifying an express condition?
(a) Express conditions are created by language
of contract (watch for words such as "if", "provided
that", "so long as", "subject to", "in the event that", “until”, and
"on condition that.").
(3) How can an express condition be satisfied?
(a) General rule – strict compliance with
express conditions.
(i)
e.g. - JY contracts to build K’s house. The contract provides “K’s payment for JY’s work is
expressly conditioned on JY’s using Reading pipe throughout.” JY instead uses comparable Cohoe pipe.
1.
The condition has not been satisfied (so K
does not have to perform, i.e., pay for the house).
(b) Exception (satisfaction by approval)- condition
based on approval of one of the contracting parties is treated as satisfied if a reasonable person would approve, unless subject is art or other matters that
are inherently discretionary.
(i)
e.g. - E contracts to paint C’s house. The contract provides that C will pay E $4,000 “subject to
C’s approval of E’s work.” Even
though expert painters compliment E’s work, C does not approve.
1.
The condition of C’s approval has been
satisfied and C has to perform (pay).
(4) How can an express condition be excused? – estoppel; waiver
(a) Estoppel –
before occurrence
(i)
Identify the person who benefits from or is
protected by the condition. Then
look for a statement by that person giving up the benefits and protection of
the condition.
(ii) Estoppel is based on a statement by the person protected by the
condition i) BEFORE the conditioning
event was to occur and requires ii) a change of position.
(b) Waiver –
after occurrence
(i)
Waiver is based on a statement by the person
protected by the condition AFTER the
conditioning event was to occur and does not require a change of position
(5) What is a constructive
condition and how is it satisfied?
(a) Constructive Condition – who goes first?
(i)
Constructive conditions are less obvious, are
created by operation of law, are keyed to order
of performance. On the bar
exam, the most common constructive condition question involves a fact pattern in which the
contract is silent as to time of payment.
In the real world, your understanding is that unless there is an express agreement for payment in advance, you pay
for work when the work is done. On
the bar exam, you need to understand that in such a situation, doing the work
is a constructive condition precedent to the payment performance.
1.
e.g. - E goes into a barbershop for a haircut. He must perform (pay) after
the constructive condition precedent (getting the haircut) is fully satisfied.
(b) Satisfaction:
(i)
standard - substantial performance.
1.
example 1 - JY contracts to build K’s house. The contract provides “All pipe in the house must be Reading
pipe.”
a.
express condition? – NO (language of express
condition was not used).
b.
constructive condition? – YES (work before
payment).
c.
Constructive condition satisfied? – YES
(constructive conditions only must be substantially complied with).
2.
example 2 - P contracts to paint 20 apartments for O for $10,000. P paints 19 of the apartments and then
stops.
a.
The constructive condition precedent of P’s
painting 20 apartments has been satisfied so that, under contract law, O has to
pay P for the 19 apartments that have been painted (b/c 19 of 20 is substantial
performance – there will be a price adjustment or damages b/c of partial breach).
3.
example 3 - P contracts to paint 20 apartments for O for $10,000. P paints 4 of the apartments and then
stops.
a.
The constructive condition of P’s painting 20
apartments has not been satisfied so that, under contract law, O does not have to pay P for the 4
apartments that she painted (4 out of 20 is not substantial performance – P
could recover for the 4 apartments under quasi-contract theory of recovery).
(ii) Divisible contracts and
the substantial performance rule:
1.
Divisible contract – like installment contract
(but not dealing with a sale of goods).
a.
의의: If the contract itself divides
the performance of each party into the
same number of parts with each part performance by one party serving as consideration for
the corresponding part performance by the other, then the contract is a
divisible contract and the substantial
performance test is applied to each divisible part of the contract.
b.
Example - P contracts to paint 20 apartments for $500 an apartment. P paints 4 of the apartments and then
stops.
i.
The constructive condition precedent has been
satisfied so that, under contract law, O has to pay P for the apartments that
she painted.
f)
Excuse of Non-performance:
i)
Excuse by a breach of the contract:
(1)
Sale of goods – perfect tender.
(a) If the tender is less than perfect, the buyer can reject the goods and withhold payment (the buyer is excused from
paying).
(2)
Common law contracts – substantial
performance and material breach rule.
(a) Common law generally requires only substantial performance.
(i)
If one party to a contract substantially
performs, the other party is required to perform.
(ii) A minor breach by one party to the contract will not excuse
performance by the other party.
(b) At common law, only a "material breach" by one party excuses the other party's performance.
(i)
"Material Breach" is the
converse of "substantial performance" (material breach results from a
performance that is not substantial).
Whether a breach is material is a question of fact.
(ii) Example
1.
P contracts to paint O's house white, two
coats, for $1,000. P neglects to
put a second coat in one of the closets.
a.
Material breach? – NO.
b.
damages? – YES.
2.
P contracts to paint O's house white, two
coats, for $1,000. P paints O’s
house purple.
a.
Material breach? – YES
ii)
Anticipatory repudiation or inability to
perform:
(1) Anticipatory repudiation:
(a) Anticipatory repudiation is (i) an unambiguous statement that the
repudiating party will not perform (ii) made prior to the time that
performance was due.
(i)
Anticipatory repudiation by one party excuses the other party's duty to
perform.
(ii) It also generally gives rise to an
immediate claim for damages for breach
(iii) Exception:
where the claimant has already finished her performance, the claimant must wait
until contract date.
(b) Retraction
- Anticipatory repudiation can be reversed or retracted so long as
there has not been a material change in position by the other party. If the repudiation is timely retracted,
the duty to perform is reimposed but performance can be delayed until
adequate assurance is provided.
(2) Inability to perform –
working not for money
(a) Likely fact pattern – You are doing work for
someone, not for money, but for something that the worker wants; however, that something
is not available to you
any more.
(i)
Example - P contracts to paint O’s house with O to convey Blackacre as her
payment for the work. Before P
finishes her painting, O sells Blackacre to X. P is excused from continuing to perform (from doing any more
painting).
iii)
Excuse by reason of “Later Agreement”
(1)
Rescission Agreement = Cancellation:
(a) A contract can be rescinded (both parties agree to rescind) if some performance is still remaining from
BOTH parties.
(i)
Example 1 – P contracts to paint O's house for $1,000 with payment to be made
when the work is completed. P
begins work. Before P completes
the work, P and O agree to rescind the contract. P cannot later sue O for the work that she did
pursuant to the contract b/c the original contract was excused by reason of a
later contract (and some performance remained from each of the parties).
(ii) Cf., - P contracts to paint O's house for $1,000 with payment to be made
when the work is completed.
After P completes the work, P and O agree to rescind the contract. P CAN later sue O on the contract b/c one side had already completed
performance.
(2)
Accord and Satisfaction (substituted performance): cf. modification
(a) Accord is an agreement to an already existing obligation to accept
a different performance in satisfaction of the existing obligation;
(b) Satisfaction is that different performance
(i)
Example - D owes C $10,000. On
January 15, D and C agree that D’s painting C’s house will excuse payment of
the debt. This agreement - paint
the house instead of pay the debt - is the accord. Performing the agreement - painting the house - is the satisfaction.
(c)
Giving more time to perform the accord - The accord
suspends legal enforcement of the original obligation to provide time to
perform the accord.
(d) Optional
Remedy - If the accord is not performed, then the other party can sue on either the
original obligation or the accord.
(3)
Modification (substituted Agreement): cf., accord and satisfaction
(a) Modification is an agreement to an existing obligation to
accept a different agreement in satisfaction
of the existing obligation.
(b) Issues to remember:
(i)
Consideration rules for modification [CL
(consideration), Art 2 (good faith), NY (writing)];
(ii) Statute of Frauds.
(4)
Novation (substituted person):
(a) A novation is an agreement between both original parties
to an existing contract to the substitution of
a new party (same performance, different party).
(b) Novation excuses the contracted for performance of the party who is
substituted for or replaced.
(c)
How is delegation different from novation?
(i)
Novation requires the agreement of BOTH parties to the original contract and excuses the
person replaced from any liability for nonperformance.
(ii) Delegation does not require the agreement
of both parties and does not excuse
the party to the original contract who sought a delegate.
iv)
Excuse of performance by a later unforeseen event:
(1) Performance of contractual duties (other than a contractual duty to
pay money) can be excused under impossibility or impracticability or
frustration of purpose:
(a) something that happens after contract formation but before the
completion of contract performance; and
(b) that was unforeseen; and
(c)
that makes performance impossible or
commercially impracticable or frustrates the purpose of the performance.
(2) 3 Basic fact patterns where issue is likely to arise:
(a) Damage or destruction of subject matter of contract:
(i)
Example 1 – P contracts to paint O’s house for $1,000. After P begins painting, the house
burns down. P is excused from
performing on this contract.
(ii) Example 2 – B contracts to build a house for O for
$100,000. After B begins work, the
house burns down. B is not excused
from performing on this contract (can still build the house).
(iii) Example 3 (seller’s risk of loss and damage or destruction) – E contracts to sell C his 1973 Cadillac for $300. After the contract but before the risk
of loss has passed to C, the Cadillac is destroyed by an unseasonable
flood. If C sues E for breach of
contract, E’s nonperformance is excused.
(iv) Example 4 (buyer’s risk of loss and damage or destruction) - Assume in #3 above that the flood occurred after the risk of loss
had passed to C. C’s performance
(payment) is not excused.
(v) Example 5 - in #3, if the subject matter was 100 sacks
of grits instead of a Cadillac E’s performance would not be excused b/c the
subject matter is fungible (replaceable).
(b) Death:
(i)
Party to contract who is special person:
1.
e.g. - H delays in building his house until he is able to get F, a famous
architect, to agree to design the house for $100,000. Before F is able to design the house, she dies. H hires another architect, AA to design
the house for $120,000. F’s
nonperformance is excused because he is a “special” person and a party to the
contract.
(ii) Person not party to the contract:
1.
e.g. – B contracts to build a house for O for $100,000. Before B builds the house, C, one of
B’s carpenters, dies. B does not
build the house. B’s
nonperformance is not excused.
(iii) Party to the contract but not a “special” person:
1.
e.g. - H contracts with P to paint H’s house because P’s bid, $3,000, was
the lowest bid H received. P then
dies. H has to pay another painter
$4,000 to paint his house. H’s
nonperformance is not excused (H can sue P’s estate for $1000).
(c)
Subsequent law or regulation:
(i)
Later law makes
performance of contract illegal - excuse by
impossibility.
1.
e.g. – C contracts with club to be nude dancer. The town passes a new law outlawing nude dancing. C shows up
to dance, the club is excused from performing (C would also be excused from
performing).
(ii) Later law makes mutually understood purpose of contract illegal - excuse by frustration of purpose.
1.
e.g. – C is a nude dancer. C contracts with Dr. to have plastic surgery to
aid in his dancing. After the
agreement but before the surgery, the town outlaws nude dancing. C is excused
from performing on the surgery contract if both parties mutually understood the
purpose for the surgery (aiding in nude dancing).
g)
Breach Remedies:
i)
Punitive damages – not generally recoverable for breach of contract.
ii)
Liquidated damages - contract can stipulate damages or method of fixing damages, but a
contract cannot provide for a penalty.
(1) Two general tests for determining whether a contract provision is a
valid liquidated damages clause or an invalid penalty provision:
(a) the amount of possible damages from any later breach of contract is
difficult to determine and
(b) the contract provision is a reasonable forecast of possible damages.
(2) Example of invalid penalty provision – On
January 15, B contracts to build a store building for O Ski Rentals. Contract requires that building be
completed by December 7th and provides for $10,000 damages for missing this
deadline (punitive b/c must pay $10,000 regardless of how late).
(3) Example of valid liquidated damages clause - B contracts to build a store building for O Ski Rentals. Contract requires that the building be
completed by December 7th and provides for damages of $500 a day (average
December daily profit of O’s other, similar stores) for each day that B is late
(changes based on the magnitude of breach).
(i)
NY – a seller of a house may keep down payment as liquidated damages as
long as down payment does not exceed 10% of K price.
iii)
Damages rules for ordinary contracts:
(1) General measure of damages – injured party
is entitled to recover an amount that would put him in as good a position as if
the contract had been performed.
(a) These rules are based on protecting P’s expectation interests by
trying to put the P in the same position as if the contract had been performed
(put this in a NY essay).
(b) Example 1 – P contracts to paint O's house for
$1,000. P breaches and O has to
pay $1,400 to another painter for the same work. O can recover $400.
(c)
Example 2 - Same facts except that O breaches shortly after P begins, after P
has incurred costs of $100. P can
recover costs actually incurred plus lost profits.
(2) Additions and limitations:
(a) Plus incidental damages - the injured
party can also recover costs she incurs in dealing with the breach such as
costs of finding a replacement.
(b) Plus foreseeable consequential damages - the injured party can also recover for consequential special
damages (damages that were special to that P) that were in reasonable
contemplation of both parties at the time of the contract.
(i)
e.g. - P contracts to paint O's house for $1,000. P breaches and O has to pay another
painter $1,400. Because the house
is unpainted, O is unable to lease the house. O can recover the $400 extra she had to pay the new painter,
but cannot recover lost rents unless it was in reasonable contemplation of both
parties.
(c)
Minus avoidable damages
(mitigation) - no recovery for loss that could have been
avoided by appropriate steps.
Burden of proof on avoidability is on the defendant (affirmative
defense).
iv)
Damage rules for sales of goods:
(1) Part 7 of Article 2 reflects the general contract damages policy of
putting the innocent party where it would have been had the contract been
performed. There are two relevant
facts: who breached and who has the goods. Thus, there are four basic Article 2 damages fact patterns
and four sets of rules:
(a) Buyer’s
Ordinary Damage: Seller breaches, buyer keeps the goods - fair market value if perfect – fair market value as delivered.
(i)
e.g. - S sells B an antique car for $30,000. The car is defective.
B keeps the car and sues for breach of contract. The jury finds that the car as
delivered was only worth $20,000; the jury also finds that if the car had been
delivered as contracted, it would have been worth $34,000. B can recover $14,000.
(b) Buyer’s
Cover Damage: Seller breaches, seller keeps the goods – market price at time of discovery of the breach – contract price
(or replacement price – contract price).
(i)
e.g. - S contracts to sell B
carpeting for $5,000. S never
delivers the carpeting (or S delivers the carpeting and B rejects it because it
is not a perfect tender). At the
time of the breach, the market price of comparable carpeting is $6,600. B can recover $1,600.
1.
What if B pays $7,000 for
its carpeting? – B can recover $2,000 (article 2 encourages replacement
deals as long as they are reasonable).
(c)
Seller’s Contract Price Damage: Buyer breaches, buyer has the goods –
contract price.
(i)
e.g. - B contracts to buy
carpeting from S. Contract price
is $800. B receives the carpeting
and does not pay for it. B owes
$800 (always owes the contract price regardless of market price).
(d) Seller’s
Resale Damage: Buyer breaches, seller has the goods – contract price – market price at time and place of delivery (or
contract price – resale price) and, in some situations, provable lost profits.
(i)
Example 1 - E contracts to sell
his 1973 Cadillac to C for $1,000 C breaches. E then sells the Cadillac to S for $800. E can recover $200 from C.
(ii) Example 2 (lost profits) - S&M
Leather contracts to sell leather clothing to C for $1,000. (Assume that C is buying goods that are
part of S&M's regular inventory--"off the rack," so to
speak.) C breaches. S&M sells the very same items to J
for $1,000. S&M can recover
damages from C.
1.
critical facts in lost profits hypos:
a.
regular inventory;
b.
there is a breach followed by a resale at
exactly the same price.
(e) Seller’s Right to Force to Buy the Goods on Buyer: The seller has a right to force goods on the buyer
who has not accept them only if the seller is unable to sell the goods or if the
goods have been lost or damaged after the risk of loss passed to the buyer
v)
Quasi-Contract:
(1) Unjust enrichment (see above).
vi)
Non-monetary remedies:
(1) Specific
Performance/Injunction: Requirement – (i) subject matter is unique; (ii) legal remedy is inadequate; (iii) enforcement must be feasible & (iv) not equitable defense
(a) Contracts for the sale of real estate;
(b) Contracts for the sale of unique goods (unique – antiques, art, custom-made)
(c)
Contracts for services – no specific
performance, money damage is good; possible injunctive relief.
(i)
Note: money
damage for contract for service: cost to hire another worker + reasonable compensation for delay in
performance
(ii) Covenant not
to compete – it can be enforced through negative specific
performance if:
1.
reasonable business need for the protection;
2.
reasonable time limitation;
3.
reasonable geographic limitation.
(2) Laches – Laches is
available as an equitable defense if the P has unreasonably delayed in
bringing the action and delay is prejudicial to the defendant
(3) Reformation:
(a) An equitable remedy.
(b) Changes a written contract.
(c)
Facts to watch for:
(i)
Mistake in writing the
agreement – people make an agreement and then do not
correctly express the agreement in writing (clerical errors).
(ii) Fraudulent misrepresentation as to what is in the agreement – one party’s mistake about what is in the writing is due to the
other party’s fraudulent misrepresentation.
(4) Adequate assurances of future performance:
(a) Look for:
(i)
one party to contract learning something after
the contract that gives him reasonable grounds for insecurity about the other
party's performance and;
(ii) written demand for adequate assurance.
(b) e.g. - P contracts to paint O's house for $1,000,
with payment due 30 days after completion of the work. After making the contract but before
performing the contract, P learns of O's record of not paying his bills. P can make a written demand for
adequate assurances.
(5) Reclamation:
(a) Right of an unpaid seller to get his goods back.
(b) Key facts are that:
(i)
the buyer must have been insolvent at the time
that it received the goods, and
(ii) that seller demand return goods within 10 days of receipt (this
"10‑day rule" becomes a "reasonable time rule" if before
delivery there had been an express representation of solvency by the buyer),
and
(iii) buyer still has goods at time of demand.
(c)
e.g. - On January 15, S sells B grits on credit. The grits are delivered to B on January
22. B is insolvent on January
22nd. S learns of B’s financial
difficulties and demands return of the grits on January 27th. B still has the grits on January
27th. S can recover the grits
though reclamation.
(6) Rights of good faith purchaser in entrustment:
(a) If an owner leaves her goods with a person who sells goods of that
kind and that person wrongfully sells the goods to a third party then such a
good faith purchaser from dealer cuts off rights of the original
owner/entruster.
(b) e.g. - O takes her watch to J Jewelers to be
repaired. J wrongfully sells the
watch to B, a bona fide purchaser for value. O cannot recover the watch from B.
h)
Third-party Problems:
i)
Third party beneficiaries:
(1) Identifying third-party beneficiary problems:
(a) Look for two parties contracting with the intent of benefiting a third
party.
(i)
Example 1 - S agrees to pay Jumbo Bagels $100 and Jumbo agrees to deliver 12
dozen bagels to E. If Jumbo
refuses to deliver the bagels, E can sue on the bagel contract.
(ii) Example 2 – life insurance policies (beneficiary can
sue insurance company)
(2) Vocabulary:
(a) Third-party beneficiary – not a party
to the contract. Able to enforce
contracts others made for her benefit.
(b) Promissor – a person who is making the promise that
benefits the third party.
(c)
Promisee – person who obtains the promise that benefits the third party.
(d) Creditor/donee – third party beneficiary
is usually a donee unless he was already a creditor of the promisee.
(3)
Dealing with efforts to cancel or modify: “Vesting”
(a) Vesting occurs when the beneficiary:
(i)
manifests assent to
the promise in a manner invited or requested by the parties;단순히 알고
있다는 사실만으로 vesting이 발생하지 않아!
(ii) bring suit to enforce the promise; or
(iii) materially changes position in justifiable reliance on the
promise.
(b) After the vesting, the contract cannot
be cancelled or modified without consent unless the contract
provides otherwise.
(4) Who can sue whom?
(a) Beneficiary can sue
promissor;
(b) Promisee can sue
promissor;
(c)
Donee beneficiary can Not sue promisee,
(d) but Creditor beneficiary (intended
3rd party beneficiary) can sue both promissor
and promisee on pre-existing debt.
(5) Defenses:
(a) If the third party sues the promissor, the promissor can assert any
defenses that he would have had if sued by the promisee.
(b) Note: the lack of
separate consideration would not
provide a defense to an action
brought by the 3rd party beneficiary.
(6)
Donee Beneficiary Exception – can sue
promissor
(a) The
promisee tells the beneficiary of the contract and should foresee reliance; and
(b) The
beneficiary reasonably relies to its detriment
ii)
Assignment of rights:
(1) Assignment is effective as soon as the assignor assigns his right in his
written assignment to assignee. Once the assignment is effective, the assignee
becomes the real party in interest, and he alone is entitled to performance
under the contract. Once the obligor has knowledge of the assignment by notice, he is bound to render
performance to the assignee. Once the obligor has notice, payment to any third party (even to assignor) does not discharge his
duty.
(a) Assignment vs. third party beneficiary:
(i)
Assignment – On January 15, Batman contracts with Gotham to provide security
services for a year; the contract provides that Batman is to be paid $300,000
for the services. Batman later transfers his rights under the contract to
Robin.
(ii) Third party beneficiary - On January
15, Batman contracts with Gotham to provide security services for a year; the
contract provides that Gotham will pay Robin $300,000 for Batman’s
services.
(2) Vocabulary:
(a) assignor – Party to the contract who later transfers
rights under the contract to another.
(b) assignee – Not a party to the contract. Able to enforce the contract because of
the assignment.
(c)
obligor – Other party to the contract.
(3) Limitations on assignments:
(a) Contract provisions:
(i)
Prohibition – language of prohibition takes away the right to assign but not the
power to assign which means that the assignor is liable for breach of contract
but an assignee who does not know of the prohibition can still enforce the
assignment.
(ii) Invalidation – language of invalidation takes away both
the right to assign and the power to assign so that there is a breach by the
assignor and no rights in the assignee.
(b) Common Law
Limitation:
(i)
Even if a contract does not in any way limit
the right to assign, common law bars an
assignment that substantially changes the duties of the obligor.
1.
Assignment of right to
payment – this does not substantially change the duty
of the obligor.
2.
Assignment of other
performance rights – this does substantially change the duty of
the obligor (e.g., personal service)
3.
C/L
Requirement Contract – The right to receive goods under a requirements
contract generally was not assignable
4.
Cf. UCC Requirement/Output Contract: it is assignable if the
quantity requirement is not unreasonably
disproportionate to the quantity originally contemplated by the party.
(4) Requirements for assignment:
(a) Must have language of present assignment (“I assign” not “I promise to assign” or “I will assign”);
(b) Consideration is generally not required.
(5) Rights of assignee:
(a) Assignee can sue obligor.
(b) Obligor has same defenses against assignee as it would have against
assignor.
(c)
Payment by obligor to assignor is effective until obligor knows of assignment
(Notice).
(d) Modification agreements between obligor and assignor are effective if the obligor does not have notice of
assignment
(6) Multiple assignments:
(a) Gratuitous assignments:
(i)
General rule – last assignee wins.
1.
It is possible to make a gratuitous
assignment. Generally, however,
such a gift assignment can be freely revoked. Revocation can be accomplished directly or indirectly by
bankruptcy, death, the assignor taking performance directly from the obligor, or the making of another assignment. Since a later gift assignment revokes
an earlier gift assignment, the general rule for resolving claims among
assignees who did not provide consideration is a last in time rule.
(ii) exception – if the gift assignment is not revocable,
then it will take priority over a later assignment.
1.
A gratuitous
assignment is not revocable if :
a. it is the subject matter of a writing delivered to the assignee,
b. the assignee has received some sort of indicia of ownership, or
c. the assignee has relied on the assignment in a way that is reasonable,
foreseeable, and detrimental.
(iii) NY
rule - Gratuitous assignment is not revocable if it is in
writing.
(b) Assignment for consideration:
(i)
General rule – first assignee for consideration wins.
(ii) limited exception - a subsequent assignee
takes priority over an earlier assignee for value only if he both
1.
does not know of the earlier assignment and
2.
is the first to obtain payment, a judgment, a
novation, or indicia of ownership (first to notify is irrelevant).
(iii) Multiple assignments for consideration as a breach of warranty – in an assignment for consideration, the assignor makes a warranty
that the rights are assignable and enforceable.
1.
Losing assignee can sue assignor for breach of
warranty.
iii)
Delegation of duties:
(1) What is a delegation? - party to a
contract transferring work under that contract to third party.
(2) Relationship of assignment and delegation:
(a) assignment – Assignment is the transfer by a party to a
contract of his rights or benefits under the contract to a third
party who was not a party to the contract.
(b) delegation - Delegation is the transfer by a party to a
contract of his duties or burdens under the contract to a third
party who was not a party to the contract.
(c)
Often a contracting party makes both an
assignment and a delegation of his rights and duties under the contract to a
third party.
(i)
Often the multistate examiners use the term
“assignment” in a problem involving an assignment and a delegation and even in
a problem involving only a delegation.
(3) Which duties are delegable?
(a) general rule – contractual duties are delegable.
(b) limitations (very limited) – delegations
are permitted unless either:
(i)
contract prohibits delegations or prohibits
assignments; or
(ii) contract calls for very special skills; or
(iii) person to perform contract has a very special reputation.
(4) Consequences of delegation:
(a) Delegating party always remains liable.
(b) Delegatee is liable only if she receives consideration from delegating
party.
(i)
Example 1 - P contracts to paint O's house for $1,000. X then agrees with P that she (X) will
do the painting for P because P is a good friend. X does not do the work.
1.
O can sue P.
2.
P cannot sue X (b/c delegation was not for
consideration),.
(ii) Example 2 - P contracts to paint O's house for
$1,000. P and X then agree that X
will do the work and P will pay X $900.
X does not do the work.
1.
O can sue P.
2.
P can sue X (b/c delegation was for
consideration).
3.
O can sue X (delegation for consideration
creates a 3rd party beneficiary obligation).
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기