Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - swifty

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 148
1
Studying and Exam Taking / Problem with K Homework.
« on: April 02, 2005, 08:58:12 PM »
I've been given a fact pattern, and the Prof wants me to list all possible damages (if any)
can the Defendant rightfully claim as damages.  The problem is I don't think there was a breach, but there must be b/c I can't just answer "no breach, no damages."  I am ussually pretty good with these; this one has me stumped.

D offers P "to come work for him" and D offers to pay P 1500.00 "net" a week.
P asks for more details.  "What type of work?"  D answers "I open up a smog smog shop for you, I train you for three months, you'll make at least 1000.00 a week for the first 3 months while I train you.  After that you will be paid "about 1500.00" per week until the year is up, and then you can buy the shop from me, I buy it from you, or we keep the current relationship as is.  P thinks about it for a week, and goes to D for more clarification.  P asks about the need for a smog technician license, where the shop will be located, and how she will know how long this offer is open. D says "look all you need to do is promise me you will get your license.  I don't care when you get it, but once you pass the test, come to me, tell me you passed, and in three weeks time you will have your license mailed to you.  During that three weeks I will get the shop ready for you, and the shop will be in Ramsville, CA, about 60 miles from where you live."  P, still not sure asks:  "How do I know if I get my license, you will open a shop for me and pay me at least 1,000 a week?"  D answers, "I do this all the time, I have 7 smog shops right now.  What we have is a bilateral contract.  You promise me you will get your license, I promise to open a shop in Ramsville, Ca, and pay you at least 1000.00 a week.  My lawyer has advised me that this is a valid contract, I have done this before, I have made you an offer, if you accept, the consideration lies in those promises.  Thus, we have an offer, acceptance, consideration, AND, a meeting of the minds."  P tells D she accepts, they shake hands, and both parties are happy.

Two weeks later, D withdrawls his offer claiming he is burnt out, and no lomger wishes to carry out this contract.  P asks why D chooses her to bail on.  D reasserts he is burnt out, and no longer desires to carry out the contract.

P has turned down another job he was hired for, based on D's promise, and now is still unemployed.  P had also looked around at various schools to get certified, yet did not commit to a school because no school would start their program until May, about two months after D's originsal offer.

Instructions:  When answering this assignment, keep in mind the Doctrine of Good Faith, and the Doctrine of Conditional Promises.  HINT:  You will not pass this assignment without discussing "anticipatory breach."

Ackkk.  Help!  Any one do one similar.  Anybody got any case law on this.  This has me stumped.

Thanks in advance...

P.S. Don't do the homework for me, that's not what I'm asking.  Just looking for ideas.

2
General Board / NEED HELP ON REAL LIFE CONTRACT QUESTION
« on: March 12, 2005, 10:28:56 PM »
An older student, realizing that I was looking for a job, (he overheard me talking to somebody about a job) stated and I quote:  "Why don't you come to work for me. I'll pat you 1500 a week net."  I took this offer to be in jest because I know the guy, and how in the hell does he know what I am going to net (after taxes)?

I decided to confront him and asked him if his offer was for real.  He said, absolutely, I don't joke about business.  He told me I need to get certified as a SMOG technician, and once I do, he will open up a shop, I run it, he trains me, after a year, I buy the shop from him.

I asked how do I know you will do this if I get certified?  He says, look, this is a K,
A promise for a promise, a bilateral K.  I promise to open up a shop for you and pay you 1500 a week net if when you show me your Smog license.  I said how do you know how much the shop will make?  He says it doesn't matter, if the shop loses money, you still get paid 1500 net per month for a year.

After all was said and done, I said "I think I am going to advantage of your offer."  He says the offer is open indefinetly to me because he has been burned before, and trusts me.  We shook hands, and I said "deal"

When I said "deal", did I make a promise?

The guy is very wealthy and really has nothing to lose.  What is his consideration then?  He isn't giving up anything.  It's contingent upon  me to get certified, therefore, I have created a detriment or benefit (1/2 glassful of water) and consideration on my side is not a problem.   What has he given up?  He is not doing anything UNLESS I get certified.

Since this is a Bi K, it is already in existance, I can breach by not getting certified, he can breach by not giving me a shop.  It seems I am missing something, and something just doesn't smell right.  Since the Bi K is already enforceable, he breaches by not opening a shop, he is out nothing, but I could sue, and should win 1500 a week for a year in damages, and even the cost of acquiring the certification  Correct? 

Obviously I won't spend the money to get certified until the exact terms are spelled out in a written agreement.  The problem is, he doesn't like written agreements, and if I ask him, he may be offended that I don't trust him.  He bases his success on the fact that his customers trust him, and he olnly makes offers like these to someone he nows he can trust.  I asked him if I could hire an employee to do the more difficult repairs, he said "Absolutley not. If your shop gets busy and you can't handle it alone, I will send one of my empolyees to your shop.  Thid is so similar to franchise type business, yet it is not as he has control over me and the shop.

Thoughts?  Helpful suggestions? 

TIA

Swifty


3
General Board / Re: Funny Contract Hypo...
« on: February 20, 2005, 04:36:45 AM »
I believe the Statute of Frauds is what regulates real estate transactions, and states the sale must be written to be enforced.

After further review, this hypo needs more info.  Ideally, it would be nice to know if we are dealing with modern common law, old common law, or has the State where the transaction taken place fully adopted the UCC rules on K's?  If it's NOT governed by the UCC, we would have to choose either common law, modern, or old.  Louisiana just has to stay out of this.  8)

When Mary "agreed" was that a promise?  Did any of the two offerees "promise" to pay?
Specific performance is really an issue here too because in the eyes of common law and the definition of a unilateral contract (uni=one promise; bi=2 promises), requires a promise from one party, this cannot be a K at all to the first offeree because an enforceable K only exists after, offer, acceptance, consideration, AND PERFORMANCE.  If the performance is missing, even in modern common law, there can be no enforceable contract.  The offerror controls the offer completely, and this is why the smart little nerdy fellows proposed the UCC, which by itself is not binding authority, but adressed the issue of offeror control.   It must be codified by the state, we would have to know if thne state adopted it in whole, or in part, to answer this question without using common  law. Even if the first offeree (under modern common law) said I promise to pay you 6000.00 for the car, Mary says "ok" or I "agree" Mary's defense would be she controlled the offer and never promised she would sell it to the first offeree.  In order for a K to exist, and a breach to occur, Mary would have had to match that promise, the same promise (mirror image) which she never did. 

4
General Board / Civ/Pro SUCKS! Could use some help....
« on: February 09, 2005, 01:47:21 AM »
Seriously.  Does anybody actually enjoy this class?

Does anyone have online access to Benders Forms and pleadings?

My school doesn't seem to care about how tough it is going to
the library on cruthes!  Especially when it's on the top shelf!

I just need a sample claim for negligence in California.  If
it breaks it down into counties, Yolo county is what I need.
If you can get it please email me: bagley@csus.edu
Thanks in advance...


5
Socratic Method / Re: Do u get called on once or more than once???
« on: December 06, 2004, 06:14:00 PM »
What have you people seen happen when somebody gets called on, they are not prepared, etc.  Spill it.  Anybody pee their pants?  Just freeze up?  I used to be so afraid of being called on that I couldn't even focus on the lecture, let alone the question asked of me.

You spill the stories, I'll reveal the trick.  Deal?

Yeah, this one kid in my class was called on and he looked all scared and his eyes got real wide. He didn't say anything. Then, all at the same time, he pissed his pants, shat himself, and vomitted all over the back of a girl's head who was sitting in front of him. The disgusting display caused the people next to him and the people who were hit by the puke to vomit as well. This caused a chain reaction whereby 10 or 15 people all started throwing up everywhere, all over laptops, on people's heads, everywhere

HTH

You are starting to annoy me DOWNY.

6
General Board / Re: Tape recorders
« on: December 06, 2004, 05:47:41 AM »
I thought I read somewhere that somebody wanted to convert .wav files to mp3's?

I just did it, took all of five minutes to find a program and convert a 22 MB .wav file to a 11 MB .mp3 file.  And I am an idiot.  Only thing is it sounds fine on Real Player, but is all distorted and staticky on Windows Media Player.  Does that help anyone?  No?  Sorry.   ???

7
Socratic Method / Re: Do u get called on once or more than once???
« on: December 04, 2004, 05:24:45 AM »
What have you people seen happen when somebody gets called on, they are not prepared, etc.  Spill it.  Anybody pee their pants?  Just freeze up?  I used to be so afraid of being called on that I couldn't even focus on the lecture, let alone the question asked of me.

You spill the stories, I'll reveal the trick.  Deal?

8
General Board / Westlaw - Does "disapproved" mean overruled?
« on: December 01, 2004, 05:53:45 PM »
I'm not real familiar with Westlaw, but my class is convinced that
this case has been "overruled in part" where I say it was "disaproved in part"
meaning it is not all "bad law," maybe only one part was disaproved.  I see
no where does it say it is "overruled."  Thoughts?

89 cal.app.3d 388

Thanks....

9
General Board / Another not so funny hypo...
« on: November 25, 2004, 09:41:55 PM »
Manny Maniac tells Suzie's social worker he is planning on killing his supervisor at work.
Manny, however, doesn't have a job.  Is Manny's statement privileged?  Explain using the FRE's.  HMMMMMMM  ;D
 

10
Studying and Exam Taking / Re: Man, I am in serious trouble...
« on: November 25, 2004, 09:36:38 PM »
I have gone through the entire testing process, and I am able to take advantage of basically everything I need.  My problem is limited to reading comp. and memory.  Period.
I have worked with the Learning Dis Ctr for about a month now, not to get accomodations,I already went through that process as mentioned,  but to fix the problem.  If it can be fixed, why avoid it with accomodations?  And, yes, I am one of those who does not want anything on my record saying I receivd any accomodations.

Those should be left to blind, deaf, mobility challenged, i.e., extremely disadavantaged.  I don't want to fill out an employer application and decide "I wonder if this firm frowns upon people who 'claim' to have learning disabilities."  We all now it shouldn,t happen, yet we also must know it does happen.  Hell, you can have a hard time finding a job if you are fat, you smoke, your ugly, bald, use too much perfume....the list goes on.

As for now I am working with a voice program that narrates the text for me as I read along.  They say 10% of people have auditory comprehension rather than reading (visual)

It seems to be helping, but since none of my books are even listed as supported by store law, I have to ask the DSLC to scan all my books to .PDF so I can read them with a voice narrater.  The cool thing about that is you get to highlight, in many different colors, what you want in your outline, and with a click of a button, there it is. But that would be an accomodation no one else gets. This is something like storelow does, but again, they do not use my books.  I have been looking around at other stuff too.  I will only take accomodations after I fail the bar 3 times.  Seriously. 
Thanks tho everybody, still a lot of options to look at. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 148