Case Study : Sam Vs. Quinn, And A National Chain Store

1766 Words8 Pages
Case Study Two, Sam vs. Quinn, and a National Chain Store In the case of Sam vs. Quinn, his landlord, and the national chain store. Sam is who is working on a great innovation, a device that sounds like a barking dog that will help assist in the safety and welfare of others. Several months ago, Sam hit the jackpot that would change his life and landed in a verbal contract to sell 1000 units to a national chain store. However, this young inventor has been mass producing this product from his place of residence, his apartment, own by Mr. Quinn. Sam arrives home one day to find two letters, one from the chain store demanding the 1000 units be delivered immediately. The other was an eviction notice from Mr. Quinn stating that his barking machine has been pestering the other tenants and that Sam was not supposed to be conducting business from his apartment. Sam is furious at both situations and decides to pro-sue the matters. Therefore, before the court can rule on these cases, the court should determine the various elements whether there is a valid contract, a quasi-contract exists, a promissory estoppel, and the rights an obligation of a tenant would prevail on Sam’s claims. Several factors must be present to establish if a valid contract exists between Sam and the chain store. Thus, the “four elements of a contract are the agreement, the consideration, contractual capacity, and the legal object” (Kubasek, 2012, p. 304). The first element of the agreement would be deemed to

More about Case Study : Sam Vs. Quinn, And A National Chain Store

Open Document