Contracts Background Don Willetts is a member at your church and owns a health food production

A contract is defined as, “a legally enforceable exchange of promises or an exchange of a promise for an act that assures that parties to the agreement that their promises will be enforceable (Kubasek 2015).” Contracts are essential for businesses to conduct business with one another. Before delving too far into the Muscadine grape case, it is also important to note that a sale is the, “passing of title to goods from buyer to seller for a price (Kubasek 2015)” and that a good is considered, “tangible personal property (Kubasek 2015).” Muscadine grapes and their by-products are the goods in question. When considering any legal case it is important to first consider the facts and the issues that are being considered.

3. Third Possible Offer. Peters response to Don of "OK, that sounds great. I just need to inform my sister first before I can act on this. This decision affects her too. Can I let you know for sure tomorrow?" does not contain the required promissory language required to show intent to form a contract. He is simply relaying that he is taking Dons invitation for an offer under consideration and must communicate with his sister prior to a decision being made.

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

Is there an implied employment contract in this situation? Should an implied contract protect Mr. Price from being fired?

In this case, there are two issues that emerge; the first entails as to whether Johnson, who is a farmer should be treated as a merchant according to the definition of the Universal Commercial Code. The other issue that emerges in the case concerns as to whether the oral contract made between the two parties of selling 600 bushels at the price of $ 4.02 should constitute a binding contract.

Most contracts are valid despite the fact that they may be only oral. Dan was knowledgeable that Pat wanted to buy a home, which she was not financially qualified to purchase. Consequently, he offered to purchase the home and sell it to her, when she had the capital to do so. The statement of Don to Pat, “When you come up with the money, I will sell the home to you for $250,000, plus a fair commission to be determined”, and Pat’s search and identification of a suitable home, and Dan’s purchase supports each intent to be bound.

Located in Any State, U.S.A Grocery, Inc. is a retail grocery store with locations all over the United States of America (U.S.A.). Tom Green and Jeff fresh work for the store located in My Town, U.S.A. Tom is the produce manager and Jeff, 17 years old, is working for Tom in the produce department. The first scenario is the contract between Grocery, Inc. and Masterpiece Construction for the renovation of the store located on Main Street in My Town, U.S.A. The second scenario is an underage contract between Jeff and Smooth Sales Used Cars. The third scenario is a breach of contract and/or promissory estopple between Tom Green and Harry. The fourth scenario is regarding an e-commerce contract between George and Grocery, Inc.

Accepting the contract Lisa knew that Clear Hear would no doubt live up to the organization statement of values with Big Box. The organization would meet the contract requirement at the cost of stopping production of the Beta Model unit. The Big Box contract would help Clear Hear to keep its employees working and the organization knew they were producing reliable phone that would exceed Big Box expectation. Anyhow, after analyzing the contract situation I feel that if Lisa accepts the contract as is, Clear Hear would lose more money than it stood to gain if Big Box decides to pay $20 per unit. For this reason I would recommend that Clear Hear do one of the following three choices: (1) Decline the contract to manufacture the phones for Big Box based on the revenue losses that the organization would incur if they agree to the contract. (2) Manufacture the phones at a loss to Clear Hear. Manufacturing the phones at loss would keep the company’s employee working which is fulfilling one of the organization’s statements of values. (3) Accept the contract but sub-contract the phone order to Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) who can produce the phones for $14 per unit. Since OEM produce the phones at $14 per unit, Lisa and Clear Hear stand to earn $1 per unit profit on the contract.

Taking the matter to court will ensure that the matter is handled legally with considerations to the agreement. The employee may be barred from continuing with the business until the agreed duration and or may be fined a certain amount.

Additionally, Mr. Williams directed his sales team to offer special pricing to current customers to flood the market with inventory prior to the expiration of the lost contract. Additionally, the sales team was directed to offer said customers grossly abnormal sales terms of 180 day payment schemes for purchase levels above the prior year. Said discounts and payment terms were utilized to block the new contract holder from entering the market in a timely manner. Furthermore, such terms were offered to inflate sales to meet expectations of the equity firm, and increase the organization’s profit levels.

affect how parties interacted in the sale of goods and services. Professor Chrisman has advertised that he has a hog (not to be confused with a pig), worth $100 to him, for sale and now has two potential purchasers. Buyer one, Professor Todd, has offered to purchase the hog today from $150 (he is risk adverse and believes that price of pigs is going to increase drastically over the next year). Buyer two, Professor Hesch, has offered to purchase the hog next Saturday at graduation for $200. If Professor Chrisman lives in a system without contract law he will accept Professor Todd’s offer of $150 today because he will be worried that Professor Hesch will change his mind before graduation and Professor Todd will have bought another hog. The law’s failure to enforce contract law has caused an inefficient misallocation of resources because Professor Chrisman cannot enforce the promise made by Professor Hesch and will not be incentivized to take the risk of selling the hog to him.

The case study under consideration concerns a producer, my family business, selling Muscadine grapes to a local merchant, Marshall, in the state of Alabama. Previous orders made by Marshall were placed over the phone with increasing quantity over time. Unbeknownst to the distributor, my son, who was 17 and while acting as a delivery agent, signed a contract with Marshall to continue the business venture. The contract with Marshall guaranteed a price schedule. However, after increasing national interest in the grapes arose, a new business opportunity with a Texas company presented itself. This new opportunity would demand the grapes once allocated for Marshall. I called Marshall and advised him of the new offer and suggested reputable substitute suppliers; however, Marshall became upset and informed me of the signed contract. Marshall’s contract and the new opportunity is the dilemma under deliberation.

The six-year contract between Randall PLC and Hopkirk PLC started in January 2013 for the sale and delivery of 1,000 widgets per month at £3,000 a month. Randall PLC then asked Hopkirk PLC to move the delivery to every other month with 2,000 widgets, Hopkirk agrees and the contract continues on this basis. Hopkirk PLC is in financial difficulties and notices the market price of widgets has dropped and asks if Randall PLC will accept £2,000 instead of £3,000 a month. Randall PLC agrees to this but only on the promise that Hopkirk will extend the existing contract when it

Certain amount is agreed for the goods or service being sold. The buyer and the seller agree on a well defined to be delivered material for a specific price and time. The contract can include some incentives fee for meeting or exceeding the project objectives. While purchasing the high cost machinery items like loader, lifter etc for the production of the product of our venture a contract was done in a fixed- price with Jason Manufacture and Suppliers Company. He supplied the heavy machinery items in time and did provide better equipments within the contracted amount. The venture was happy so he as incentive fee and promised to give him more contracts in the mere future.