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 - tonyp

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6
11
U of Texas - Austin / .
« on: June 13, 2006, 01:47:07 PM »
.

12
U of Texas - Austin / .
« on: June 09, 2006, 11:55:20 AM »
.

13
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 03, 2007, 11:49:27 AM »
No I wouldn't, but that was only my secondary point. This is getting kinda boring though. I think you know bloody well what I mean, and I think you agree and just felt like making an argument out of how you, with your wonderful contract classes, know about oral contracts and how incredibly awesome they are. Where as everyone knows that in real life, an oral contract isn't worth jack *&^%, and while they're often enough tried in courts (there's a reason why they're so frequently tried - because it's inherently difficult to enforce one) even there they more frequently fail than prevail.

Very persuasive, KeNo.  I'm guessing that with your copious real life experience (to which I am no stranger myself, as it happens) you'll have much to offer your professors and classmates.

I do agree that watching you trying to defend your original assertion has turned from amusing to pointless, rather like watching a monkey @#!* a football.

14
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 02, 2007, 06:41:08 PM »
Go back to your 1L contracts professor and ask him about the value of a verbal contract compared to the value of the paper which it is(n't) written on.

So you agree that an oral contract can exist and is enforceable?

Can exist yes, is enforceable no. That was my entire point really.


And so you would be sorely mistaken.  That was my entire point, really.




15
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 02, 2007, 11:19:29 AM »
The question is, like in my case, that there was never a stated requirement about exclusivity. If a requirement was never discussed then how is applying to others schools breaking any rules/contract?

It probably isn't, but not for the reasons originally offered (no signature, not in writing, etc.). 

Quite apart from the contract issue, there's an argument that squatting on a deferred spot at one school while trying to upgrade the following cycle is ethically questionable, but that's a different topic.

16
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 02, 2007, 10:49:34 AM »
It can exist (offer, acceptance, & consideration), I am not disputing that at all. But we are talking about a real-life specific situation where they would or would not be used. I seriously doubt a law school, or any school, or even anyone outside of 2 buddies on a street corner would try to enforce a verbal contract. It is not smart business.

Suits including oral contract claims are not terribly uncommon.  It really depends on the stakes.  In the situation at hand, it's incredibly unlikely that a school would bother to seek a remedy beyond exercising its right to withdraw the acceptance (if the deferral had a corresponding condition).  However, that's a far different proposition from stating that "if it's not signed, it's not enforceable" and "no one outside 2 buddies on a street corner would try to enforce an oral contract." 


17
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 02, 2007, 09:47:37 AM »
Go back to your 1L contracts professor and ask him about the value of a verbal contract compared to the value of the paper which it is(n't) written on.

So you agree that an oral contract can exist and is enforceable?

18
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 01, 2007, 09:46:14 PM »
Take your first-year contracts class and get back to us on that.

OR... you could step up and give an actual example.

Agent of school X in conversation with applicant Y: "In exchange for your promise not to apply to other schools in the interim, we promise to allow you to matriculate at school X in 364 days' time."

Applicant Y replies to agent of school X: "I accept your offer and promise not to apply to other schools in the interim."

19
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 01, 2007, 08:58:15 PM »
Right....

So what kind of agreement could a university make with you that is binding but does not require you to sign said agreement? I'd really like to know.

Take your first-year contracts class and get back to us on that.

20
Law School Applications / Re: Deferred and reapply?
« on: October 01, 2007, 12:50:16 PM »
If there's no signature, there's no agreement nor terms. The issue is always signature, and that's not just related to law school :)

KeNo, this is absolutely, categorically false.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6