Business Law

Accounting to the Statute of Frauds , "if a contract is required to be in writing under the Statute of Frauds but is not, the contract is unenforceable. The parties may voluntarily perform a contract that is unenforceable." (Cheeseman, p158) Actually, they both signed a written agreement that "as is, without any warranties" after the Marge told Joan that she would fix any problems with the drivetrain that arose in the first 1,000 miles. The first 1,000 miles should had been written on the contract in order to become enforceable. Since the promise was made before the negotiation, there might have some change before the agreement was signs such as lower the price. So, Joan would not be honer for the first 1,000 miles warranties in this case as she signed "as is". Now, let's discuss the repair fee, Under UCC Statute of Frauds Section 2-201(1) A section of the Uniform Commercial Code which states that sales contracts for the sale of goods costing $500 or more must be in writing. (Cheeseman, 223) Since the repair fee was under $500 in this case, no writing contract needed to be made. Since the repair fee is in oral agreements that was made later and modify the

-The Issue: were all the elements of a contract present to make the contract enforceable?

case brief---Gregory, a comedy writer, entered into a contract with Wessel, a comedian. The contract provided that Gregory would provide Wessel with a 15 minute monologue for his upcoming appearance on the comedy hour and Wessel will pay $250 to Gregory. All performers could make $500 per appearance on the comedy hour. and when Wessel was scheduled to aper on the comedy hour, Gregory informed him that he was unable to provide the monologue, because last time Wessel was asked to make special guest appearances at three local comedy clubs performance during the comedy hour. and Wessel bought lawsuit to Gregory for beach of contract and request damages of $1250.

In the case of Sam vs. Quinn, his landlord, and the national chain store. Sam is who is working on a great innovation, a device that sounds like a barking dog that will help assist in the safety and welfare of others. Several months ago, Sam hit the jackpot that would change his life and landed in a verbal contract to sell 1000 units to a national chain store. However, this young inventor has been mass producing this product from his place of residence, his apartment, own by Mr. Quinn. Sam arrives home one day to find two letters, one from the chain store demanding the 1000 units be delivered immediately. The other was an eviction notice from Mr. Quinn stating that his barking machine has been pestering the other tenants and that Sam was not supposed to be conducting business from his apartment. Sam is furious at both situations and decides to pro-sue the matters. Therefore, before the court can rule on these cases, the court should determine the various elements whether there is a valid contract, a quasi-contract exists, a promissory estoppel, and the rights an obligation of a tenant would prevail on Sam’s claims.

The mistake occurred. Mary McDonald entered into an agreement in such a way that the

Gregory, a comedy writer, entered into a contract with Wessel, a comedian. The contract provided that Gregory would provide Wessel with a 15 minute monologue for his upcoming appearance on the comedy Hour and that Wessel would pay Gregory $250. All Performers on the comedy Hour make $500 per appearance. As Gregory knows, the last time Wessel appeared on the Comedy Hour he was asked to make special guest appearances at three local comedy clubs using the same monologue. Wessel earned a total of $750 for the three performances. Shortly before Wessel was scheduled to appear on the comedy Hour, Gregory informed Wessel that he was unable to provide the monologue. As a result, Wessel was forced to cancel his appearance. Wessel sued for breach of contract and requested damages of $1,250. What will result? Issue, -

[I]t follows that Hennigan was not entitled to compensation for the 1967 football season from the Chargers. He suffered no injury while in the performance of any services required of him after the option was exercised. Consequently, he is not entitled to payment under paragraph 15 (the injury provision)

A bilateral contract comes into existence at the moment promises are exchanged. True, “promise for a promise”

A dealer sold a new car to Raymond Smith. The sales contract contained language expressly disclaiming liability for personal injuries caused as a result of defects in the car and limiting the remedy for breach of warranty to repair or replacement of the defective part. One month after purchasing the auto, Smith was seriously injured when the car veered off the road and into a ditch as a result of a defect in the steering mechanism of the car.

Under the law of partnership, all partners were jointly and severally liable for the debts, because the acts of one partner, acting within the apparent scope of his authority, bound the entire partnership. The court found that the trial court did not clearly err in determining that the mechanic 's liens, held by the suppliers, were inferior to the construction mortgages perfected by the banks. The mortgages were recorded prior to the commencement of the construction of the improvements on each project site, so they were prior to the suppliers ' liens, relating to construction materials obtained thereafter. Further, the mortgages were valid under Ark. Stat. Ann. § 51-605, because the aggregate sum requirement in the mortgage satisfied the

1. Identify the ethical, strategic, operational, and financial issues in this scenario and list them in priority order from most to least critical.

Held: He was not entitled to commission for the period when he sold other supplier's goods.

I agree with the court’s decision in favor of Mills. The case fall under the Statue of Fraud One year rule as it had been 107 months since the oral contract was created. The oral agreement was unenforceable after the time period as it violates the Statute of Fraud. Mrs. Sawyer did not have the agreement in writing; therefore it could not be enforced even though he had paid a little over 13 months in checks.

Numerous pieces of evidence led me to my conclusion about the contract in question. The first item of business a judge would attend to when making a decision is to decide whether a contract is present between any of the parties, and who those parties are. The contract under examination is between buyers Jon and Marsha and the seller Boren Deal. The documents pertaining to this case include the REPC as well as Addendum No. 1 which states the seller’s terms, and Addendum No. 2, the

Mrs. Turner has decided to start her own business running a private day nursery. It is