« on: December 06, 2005, 02:55:55 PM »
Who wants some practice with a Contracts hypo?
I dont feel like waiting until January to find out how I did on my exam. Could someone post a response to this or at least spot the issues so I can see if I spotted all the issues?
Some of the facts are wrong here but it is close enough. (Its also a much more brief fact pattern that is less confusing. Some of the wording he used was confusing.) Ill post any other facts I remember if I realize that I messed up the fact pattern.
Also, we only had an hour for each of these questions. So it would be nice if someone could respond with which issues seem to be the most important and seem to have required more in depth analysis than other minor issues that we should have knocked out of the way more quickly.
One more thing -- we haven't covered much in this class. We've only covered: Remedies (brief overview, we're coming back to it later), Consideration, Promissory Estoppel, Restitution/Quasi Contract, Offer, and Acceptance (including Battle of the Forms).
_____________________________ _____________________________ ____________________________
QUESTION 1 (1 hour)
Ben Braverman worked for an armored truck and security company called C. One day back in the 1951 the armored truck that Braverman was driving along with two other security guards was robbed. The robbers somehow took the handcuffs from the three of them and handcuffed them. The robbers took $3.5 million in cash. The robbery occurred on a bridge and the robbers pushed Braverman and the other two guards off the bridge while they were in cuffs. Somehow, Braverman was miraculously able to wiggle out of the cuffs, get out of the water, and catch the license plate of the robbers. As a result, the robbers were caught and the money was returned to C.
Braverman became somewhat of a hero. A movie called Handcuffs was released and it became a box office hit. C owned all the rights to the movie and made millions. He kept the handcuffs as a souvenir. Presently, they are worth $50,000.
In 2001, as part of the 50 year anniversary of the release of Handcuffs, C decided that they wanted more publicity. So they put an advertisement in the papers and ran it for two months, from August to September. The ad stated [something along the lines of]: $100,000 reward to anyone who returns the handcuffs from the incident in 1951
In 2003, Clammy was fishing in the river and the handcuffs turned up. He had not heard of the reward for the handcuffs. In fact, he had not even heard of the movie Handcuffs or the incident in 1951. Several days later, one of Clammys friends told him about the reward, and Clammy tried to claim it. C told him they had to think it over.
The reward claim by Clammy resulted in a lot of publicity for C. Soon after, Braverman (now retired and about 80 years old) claimed the $100,000 reward.
C comes to your office asking if they have to pay both the rewards. C wants to know if they should issue a press release informing the public that the reward is no longer being offered, especially considering that there is one other pair of handcuffs that still have not been located.
Advice C as the rights and liabilities of all parties.
QUESTION 2 (1 hour)
This question is based on the facts of the previous question.
Braverman now has a lawyer named Rob. Rob writes a letter to C stating [something along the lines of] I would like to propose a deal. If you pay Braverman $50,000 for the handcuffs, the handcuffs are yours, and Braverman will promise not to bring any future lawsuits regarding the handcuffs or the reward.
Going back to the 50s
C had sent a letter to Braverman following his heroic feat in 1951 saying: [something along the lines of] All property that is owned by C must be returned to C. You may keep the handcuffs until we decide that we want them back. This clause was part of the contract that all employees signed that worked for C. Braverman signed the contract with that clause on it six months after he began working at C. He continued working there for 40 years.
The employees union is currently in the process of bringing a lawsuit against C. They are trying to get the clause excluded from the contract.
The senior partner for your firm (again, your firm is advising C) poses a hypothetical to you: Suppose that C decides to settle with Braverman. Will C then be able to void the contract and get the $50,000 back from Braverman?
Advise C as to the rights and liabilities of all parties, taking into consideration the potential lawsuit with the employees union.