Contracts Analysis : Case Studies

Mr. Slim Jim verbally submitted an offer to Mr. Potbelly who proceeded to accept Mr. Slim Jims’ offer unequivocally (pg. 122). The “Basic Requirements of a Contract” (pg. 107) were completed. In this bilateral contract (pg. 107), “Communication of Acceptance” (pg. 123) was evident as Mr. Potbelly responded “Sure I’ll take it” when Mr. Slim Jim submitted an offer for the pottery and enthusiastically replied “I’ll take it!” when Mr. Slim Jim gave him an offer of cash for his home. As a result of this, Mr. Slim Jim is suing for the “right to obtain specific performance” asking that the agreement be upheld. Also, according to “admissions” (one of the “exceptions to the statutes of frauds” (pg. 175) Mr. Potbelly’s agreement should be upheld.

In this case, there are several important issues to note. The initial issues is that a contract was signed by a minor acting on behalf of the company and not by a specified owner of the company. The question here is if this contract is legally binding and what recourse of actions the parties may have. The first step would be to consider the legality of the contract. In order for a contract to be legal it has to possess several important criteria. Contracts have to be communicated to the parties it effects clearly. (Kubasek 2015). In this case, the contract was not communicated at all to the owners of Muscadine grapes and it was also not

In order to advise Billy in whether he is entitled to the extra $20,000 and a share in the farm, the key facts and relevant issues must be examined to determine if the elements of a legally binding contract exists. Whether there was an agreement and intention to create legal relations between the two will be used to determine whether Choy has breached a contract between the two. If a contract is found to

This discussion board post will respond to various questions regarding the Contracts Analysis Case Study involving Marshall Petersen and his local health food business from a

The evidence showed that the contract to purchase appellant’s business and the promissory note were signed only by Joe Alexander on behalf of the corporation. Harris’ wife testified that appellees were not present when the contract was signed.

The intent of this mediation memo is to explain the breach of contract by the Muscadine grape producer, with whom l had entered into an agreement with to supply Muscadine grapes for my business. The agreement was supposed to account for a fixed price schedule, and I will delve into the facts of the case to clarify the breach of contract. I will explain the legal issues of the contract breach, request possible restitution, and appeal to conditions under which we can arrange a settlement.

She signed the contract and addends and signed most of the signature lines, but not all of them and crossed off certain provisions she did not agree with. After not hearing from Ms. Norkunas for a week or so, the buyers were notified that she was taking her property off the market. The buyers immediately sued the seller for performance of the letter of intent she signed, which they felt entitled them to the property. During the discovery process, they found out she not only crossed out provision which they would have obliged to, but the fact that she signed the contract; they then sough performance for the contact.

I have being living in Montroogermy Alabama for over six months now.I recentlt met the defendent at a local church I have been attending. The defendent has a family owned produce business an approached me about possibly supplying me with new products. He offered me samples of Muscadine grapes. He offered me these grapes or to purchase samples of products with these seeds. The samples I was provided became very popular with my customers. I began to regular orders with the defendents company. As these products becane popular I also began to invest heavily in the advetisement of these products. Due to the ongoing business relationship and after reviewing my investment costs I decided to write a requirements contract. I provided this contract to the to the defendent to safe guard my investments. This contract was clear and concise.This contract guaranteed a price schedule consistent with what I have always paid the defendent for these Muscadine grape products. The contract was presented to the owners son who I assumed was a fair representative of the company. I informed the son that this contract needed to be signed to guareente a continuing business realtionship that implies duty of good faith and fair dealing . The defendent has informed me of a offer from a company in Texas that offered to pay twice the rate for these products with the conditon of a output contract as apart of the deal(case study). Due to a skyrocketing demand for these Muscadine products and this

The Grape producer which was my wife’s Sunday school teacher and I entered a professional business relationship after I revealed to him that I was interested in expanding and growing my business by adding new product lines. Subsequently, he introduced me to the Muscadine products that his family produced, resulting with me sampling the products and ultimately because of the product line success, I increased shipments and heavily promoted the items with marketing and advertising. Moreover, because of the Grape Producer’s ability to supply me with all the product I needed when I needed it, and at the consistent prices over the last 6 months I decided to formalize our implied contract in which both merchants provided product for payment without a formal written contract (Kubasek et al., 2016). Nonetheless, because of the trust for the Grape Producer’s outstanding record of integrity through actions and words reveals “let your yes be yes or no be no; and anything more than that comes

Gene and Martha Jannusch owned and operated Festival Foods, a concessions truck that sold food at events. The Jannusches orally contracted with Lindsey and Louann Naffziger to sell Festival Foods for $150,000. The Naffzigers paid $10,000 immediately and planned to pay the remainder after obtaining a loan. The Naffzigers took possession but later backed out of the agreement. The Jannusches sued for breach of contract. Louann acknowledged that there was an oral agreement, but Lindsey testified that the $10,000 payment was for the option to purchase the business later. Lindsey admitted to taking possession of Festival Foods, receiving income, purchasing inventory, and paying expenses. Nevertheless, the Naffzigers returned the truck and trailer

Mr. Washington made a claim that the disclaimer of any consequential damages located in the Purchase Order Acknowledgement is not part of the contract between Burger and Pine. A contract was made because Burger made an offer to Pines and then Pines accepted the offer. Section 2-207 of the Gould Commercial Code (GCC) says that a written confirmation made in a reasonable amount of time is an acceptance, even if additional terms or different terms than those offered or agreed upon are stated (Efrat, 2009, Page 14). An acceptance can be confirmed because Pines accepted Burgers contract by responding with a Purchase Order Acknowledgement. Pines also fulfilled the reasonable time requirement by sending their Purchase Order Acknowledgment in 5 days.

However, the only agreement that Martin had implied was with the restaurant, which was made in good faith. Furthermore, the restaurant failed Martin because of their neglect to maintain their company’s property, which intern lead to the theft.

Simon, the manager of the damaged Burger Ranch, inspected the tree, was satisfied with the tree, initialed the receipt, and paid the $150 for the tree. These facts definitively imply that the buyer did accept the goods after he had a reasonable opportunity to inspect it and then made the judgement that it conformed to their satisfaction, therefore legally accepting the goods.

I began to visit my wife’s church and I met a man who is the producer of Muscadine Grapes. We spent some time speaking to each other and I disclosed that I am in the health food business and interested in the health benefits the Muscadine Grapes possess. I was then asked by the grape producer if I would like to promote his product in my store. Once I received my samples of the grapes, they became very popular and I began to need more products to keep up with the demand. I invested a significant amount of money advertising the product. Due to the high demand of the Muscadine Grapes, I asked the delivery driver to sign a requirements contract to ensure the grape producer will not suddenly stop supplying my store or raising the prices on the product. An Article from The Huffington Post reported on the antioxidant benefits of the Muscadine Grapes. Shortly thereafter, Muscadine Grapes popularity skyrocketed throughout the nation and sales continued to escalate. The grape producer called me and informed me that a company out of Texas was willing to pay him double for the Muscadine Grapes and he gave me the names of other possible suppliers. He also said he would give me the names of potential suppliers that may decide to sell me the grapes but it is not guaranteed. The bottom line is that the Muscadine Grape producer was offered a significant amount of money to sign an output contract with the other company doubling the amount of money I was paying him for the

Contracts, business, and laws are three simple little words, but when put together they have a substantial impact on our everyday lives. Below we will discuss three case studies. The first case is between Chris, Matt, and Ian vs. Donald Margolin, who was injured when he used an aftershave lotion that he bought off the internet called Funny Face. The second case is between Sam, his landlord, and a national chain store. Sam is being accused of conducting business from his apartment and going back on a verbal promise. In the last case is two lifelong friends who decided to join in a partnership and open up a sporting goods shop. Therefore, before the appropriate court can proceed with the first case, the court should take into several considerations around the rules of jurisdiction, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), and whether or not corporation/or corporate offices can be held for the criminal or potential act. In the second case before the court can rule the court should determine the various elements of a valid contract, if a quasi-contract exists, a promissory estoppel, and the rights an obligation of a tenant would prevail on Sam 's claims. Finally, in the third case between Jeb and Josh, they should determine the type of business entity that will overall protect their business and personal needs.