Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Contracts help  (Read 327 times)

Leaf2001br

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 526
  • My two cents.
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Leaf2001br
    • View Profile
    • Isaac Online
    • Email
Contracts help
« on: November 28, 2005, 07:14:04 PM »
If anyone wants to humor me with some very unintimidating contracts questions, or just feels like showing off please feel free.  My pride was left at the doorstep when I realized that I will be studying nonstop from now until they hand me the exam.

Reliance

What are the limits of reliance interest?  If A promises to sell me his car and I build a garage, buy fuzzy dice, and a car stereo system, are these expenses reasonably foreseeable?  Would it matter if I had another car that I could park in the garage, hang the dice and install the stereo in? Would I have a duty to apply these expenses to my other car to mitigate the damages?


Privishing

What is privishing?  I have seen it on an old exam and it is not in my book at all except for one brief mention in a case (I think Zilg v. Prentice-Hall) where the footnote just says that the editors think this was the first time the term was used.


Callano v. Oakwood Park Homes

In this case, developer Oakwood is in the process of constructing a house and contracts to sell the lot and completed house to Pendergast.  Pendergast hired a landscaper to plant shrubs on the property but dies before paying for the completed work.  Oakwood and Pendergast's estate agreed to void the sale contract.  THEN...with knowledge of the planted shrubs, Oakwood sells the property, shrubs and all, to someone else.  The landscaper sued Oakwood under quasi-contract for the value of the shrubs.  The court denied their claim, and pointed out that the proper remedy available was against Pendergast's estate, and cited authority that says under quasi-contract you cannot "substitute one promisor or debtor for another."

My question is:  Assuming the landscaper didn't have access to Pendergast's estate why wouldn't he be able to claim unjust enrichment when Oakwood had been paid by the new buyer for the house that included shrubs?

***Okay***...Just while typing that I think I figured it out.  Geez. I'll go ahead with it anyway.  It seems it is because as long as he does have access to Pendergast's estate he cannot substitute another debtor.  If he didn't have access to Pendergast, I assume he could then bring the claim against Oakwood. (?)

Okay, one more angle just in case anyone is actually enjoying this.  For some reason my professor never covered 3rd party beneficiaries at all so bear with me...  But couldn't the landscaper have brought action as a 3rd party beneficiary?  If so, is such an action allowable under quantum meruit or only contract price?   
"What is Legal?  What is Illegal?  What is 'Barely Legal'?"  - Ali G

celarkobri

  • Guest
Re: Contracts help
« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2005, 10:04:15 PM »
Reliance

What are the limits of reliance interest?  If A promises to sell me his car and I build a garage, buy fuzzy dice, and a car stereo system, are these expenses reasonably foreseeable?  Would it matter if I had another car that I could park in the garage, hang the dice and install the stereo in? Would I have a duty to apply these expenses to my other car to mitigate the damages?

I think the reasonableness of your fuzzy dice and stereo, etc, is a question of fact left to the jury.
Also, there is no real duty to mitigate. You can put your dice in the other car, or leave them in your bedroom, it doesn't matter. But if they weren't found to be a reasonable expense, then you don't get reimbursed.

Quote
Privishing
This, I do not know.


Leaf2001br

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 526
  • My two cents.
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Leaf2001br
    • View Profile
    • Isaac Online
    • Email
Re: Contracts help
« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2005, 11:07:21 PM »
So basically just a question of fact applied to a reasonableness standard.

Um, Wow... You'd think I could have seen that one coming. 

Now which one is the plaintiff again?  Is that one that's always angry?
"What is Legal?  What is Illegal?  What is 'Barely Legal'?"  - Ali G

wkirby

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Contracts help
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2005, 01:16:49 AM »
I've got the same answers as celarkobri - It just all hinges on that reasonableness standard.  I do think that you owning another car would be a deal breaker unless you were expanded a current garage, or maybe if this car were so fancy or worthy of protection that it may need a garage whereas your other car didn't.  Really i'm just throwing out ideas dealing with the reasonableness standard. 

I've never heard of privishing.

I'm too burned out to remember much from our discussion of Callano, but from my memory you're right on that he did have access to a suitable legal remedy.  Absent that, he could go after Oakwood.  Sorry I couldn't add more!