Vinson had a severe gambling problem. Every night, he stayed awake to the early hours of the morning picking games and spreads and betting online or calling his bookie. Finally, Vinson's wife, Bethany, had enough of Vinson's gambling. Bethany entered into a written contract with Hyacinth, a gambling addiction therapist who agreed to treat Vinson twice a week for six months. The contract is signed in writing (by the contract parties. Bethany and Hyacinth; and, of course, also by the patient. Vinson). Vinson then begins his counseling. However, after two months, Bethany sees no improvement in Vinson's behavior. After all, her debit cards just got declined at the store, and when she confronted Vinson, he simply stated, "I lost $1,000 on the Miami Marlins last night." Bethany decides she is going to breach the contract, that is, to stop paying Hyacinth. What would a court most likely find, if Hyacinth sues Bethany to enforce the contract and make Bethany pay for the breach? O UCC Article 2 governs; Bethany will pay a remedy of lost profits to Hyacinth, because the sessions were not completed, and the original contract did not specify the length of Vinson's recovery. O Common law governs; a judge would find in favor of Hyacinth, making Bethany liable to pay under the terms of the contract. O UCC Article 2 governs; Bethany will not have to pay a remedy or lost profits to Hyacinth, because the treatment did not work. O This type of case would be heard in a court of equity, and both parties must tender specific performance. O Hyacinth had no enforceable rights with Bethany because Hyacinth had furnished no consideration to Bethany (the therapy sessions were simply between Hyacinth and Vinson).

Please provide reaction on discussion below if you agree or disagree: William refrained from certain behaviors, as requested by his uncle, in exchange for a large sum of money. Since the executor of Story's estate refused to pay William, claiming that the contract lacked consideration, there is a theory of consideration that William can rely on. William can invoke the concept of forbearance, which he did by refraining from drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until he reached the age of 21. This act of forbearance on his part can be considered adequate consideration for the contract. In this case, even though refraining from liquor and tobacco has been beneficial for William's health, it can still be considered a legal detriment or forbearance for the contract. Considering the facts presented, William fulfilled his uncle's requirements, and Story acknowledged that William had fulfilled his part of the bargain. Based on this, there was valid…

Francine posts on social media that she will pay $500 to anyone who will clear her lawn of leaves. One of Francine's friends is dating Bob, who goes out and collects all the leaves. When he asks for payment, Francine says that the two never had a contract. Is Francine correct? Briefly explain.

In the Silvestri v. Optus Software, Inc. case, the employment contract contained a 2-year employment agreement with a satisfaction clause. Which of the following was held? A. The satisfaction clause was not enforced, because it was a restraint on trade. B. The satisfaction clause was not enforced, because it was subjective. C. The employer breached the contract and had to pay damages. D. The termination of employment before the 2- year period was enforced.

George develops upper- and middle-income townhouses and condo flats. He hired Pommella as his agent to sell the flat. Pommella is engaged on a fixed-term contract and is paid a predetermined salary plus commission according on the number of flats she sells. George is considering ending the agency relationship with Pomella. Explain to him THREE (3) options to end the relationship lawfully under agency law.

Dimitri lends his brother, Calvin, $1,800. Calvin and Willa agree that Calvin will build a new pool deck for Willa in exchange for Willa paying Dimitri $1,800. Calvin builds the pool deck, but Willa refuses to pay Dimitri any money. Can Dimitri sue for payment? O No, because Dimitri was not a party to the contract. O No. because Dimitri did not build the pool deck. O Yes, because Dimitri is a donee beneficiary. O No, because Dimitri is an incidental beneficiary. Yes, because Dimitri is a creditor beneficiary.

Which of the following represents an agency relationship?     1)  Horace wants to sell his farm and hires Marcie as his realtor. The two agree that if Marcie finds a buyer for the farm at Horace's price, then Horace will pay Marcie 7% of the price he receives.   2)  Bob dies and leaves his assets in a trust for his minor child, Lilly. In the trust, Bob appoints Reggie as the trustee to act for Lilly's benefit. Since Reggie has a fiduciary duty to Lilly as trustee, Reggie is Lilly's agent.   3)  Lucy contracts to sell her car to Tony for $5,000. Tony purchases the car only to find it not in the condition that Lucy described it. Tony is claiming that Lucy violated her fiduciary duty to him as his agent under the agreement.   4)  Hunt is an attorney of questionable ethics. Roger, one of Hunt's clients, is arrested for DUI, but appears to be too intoxicated to consent to a breath test. Hunt is contacted by…

Cari enters a single-agency relationship with a listing broker, who owes her full disclosure and loyalty. The listing broker then finds Buyer Bonnie who wants that same broker to represent her in a transaction broker relationship, providing Bonnie with certain duties such as limited confidentiality. Can the broker represent Cari in a single-agency relationship AND represent Bonnie as a transaction broker in the same transaction? No, because offering Bonnie limited confidentiality would conflict with the full disclosure already owed to Cari. Yes, but only if the limited confidentiality owed to Bonnie is needed to fulfill Cari's objective of selling the property. Yes, as long as the broker tries to be fair to br + parties.

What is the principle of vicarious liability (respondeat superior)?

Vozzello is on a domestic flight heading from Seattle to Baltimore when he experiences a medical emergency. Thankfully, Doctor Amalia is also on the plane and is able to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation ("CPR") to keep him stabilized until they land, at which point he is taken to a local hospital for further treatment. Two weeks later, Vozzello is shocked when he receives a $37.000 bill from Amalia for the services she provided. Amalia argues that $37,000 is reasonable because she is a nationally renowned cardiovascular specialist who graduated from one of the top medical schools in the world. Which of the following statements is correct? Since Vozzello benefitted from Amalia's services, an implied-in-fact contract was formed. He is therefore required by law to pay her typical rate, and $37.000 is justified considering her qualifications. Since Vozzello benefitted from Amalia's services, an implied-in-law contract was formed. He is therefore required by law to pay her typical…