Law 421 Week 4

Based on reading from the week 1 material and the case brief given from week 1, there will be an explanation of how the Supreme Court’s language and results of the case reviewed show the preemptive power of congress in upholding the laws set forth by congress in opposition from the State Law. There will also be a review of the rulings effect on other states and peoples’ rights. The review of congresses decision about preempting state law in this case shows that the government has supreme rule over the land and in this case used it to protect the tobacco industry. Business law and law in

16) Harry sees an AK-47 automatic assault rifle in a gun shop window. He inquires about the price and is told that it is $2,500. Harry signs a contract promising to pay the $2,500 on Friday, taking possession of the rifle when payment is made. On Thursday, a law is enacted making the ownership, sale, or possession of an automatic rifle illegal. This contract

The principle of law is that for a valid contract to be formed there must be an agreement reached by both parties.

With McCrudo destroyed by the storm and with no where else to go, Ricky and his crew join the warm welcoming Delta research facility - Who is run by a woman called Rebecca. As the crew members of McCrudo settle down in to their new home, they begin to pull their weight around the base by doing various chores. Ricky becomes suspicious of Delta’s operations, when he comes across a prison like science lab with an array of security features, such as cameras, locks and sensors. When asked what this lab is used for, and why is there so much security, Rebecca warns Ricky to stay out of her business.

In my opinion, I think Corey was feeling hot cognition, hot cognition is a hypothesis on motivated reasoning in which a person thinking is influenced by their emotional state.

Had I not been misinformed and read your e-mail that arrived on July 11th the documents would still not have been ready to sign on Friday. I would have reviewed the file and typed the necessary loan documents. Depending on what else I was working on in the course of my Job I would have had them ready on Wednesday or Thursday (same day they were ready). At this point David Stalheim would have received them for review. Once I got them back I would have routed them to the Legal, Mayor and Finance department for signatures. I would not have received them back (best case scenario) until Wednesday August 12th. This is something that I tried to explain to you earlier in the week.

I went for a money order at this location today (06-07-17) at 04:30:53 AM. The gentleman at the desk was so mad at me for no reason. I told him I wanted a money order of $920. He has decided to provide only the amount on my bill. I repeated to him that this amount is not the amount I intended. He was mad; he did the money and just threw it at the window like throwing a loaf of meat to a beast. PLS is my only checking service for longtime. I trust the company (PLS) and vis-versa. I was so puzzled about this surprising attitude that is far away from customer satisfaction. Also, this night time man always has a kind of attitude when serving black people. I saw him with smile while white customers are present. He is black just like me. Subsequently,

I’m writing because I purchased a box of Veet wax Strip Kit, 20 wax strips and 4 wipes. However, the box only contained 4 bikini and underarm strips (supposed to be 8) and 6 facial strips (supposed to be 12). I paid $5.32 for this at Wal-Mart store; I would like to have what I paid for 20 wax strips, 8 bikini and underarm strips and 12 facial strips.

As you know, eight months ago we entered into a contract with Citizen-Schwarz AG to create custom e-banking software. The agreed contract outlined the details of the arrangement, including on-schedule delivery and quality of the deliverables, strong communication between both parties, procedures for any changes in the system requirements, intellectual property rights, and dispute management procedures. Depending on our performance, we were projecting to gain an additional contract with C-S’s larger e-CRM order. Unfortunately, the original contract was filled with ambiguity from the start that increased the risk factor for both parties.

To whomever it may concern today, November 9, 2016, I received an email for a bill with UMUC. I have made a payment plan with them that was created on November 3, 2013 and the next payment would not be until December 15, 2016. I am concern that, forever what reason, UMUC is not recognizing this payment despite having to go through my account with them in-order to set-up this payment plan. Is there anyway to check to see if there is something going wrong with my

The financial or economic interest is an important motivating factor for employees; however, when the gap in salaries is high, it could result in dissatisfaction and affect the business economically.

The parties did have a contract for exclusive negotiation rights as stated in the case scenario. Big Time Toymaker (BTT) paid Chou $25,000 for a 90-day period of exclusivity, thus prohibiting Chou from soliciting or entertaining offers from other parties. The agreement stipulated that unless it was written no distribution contract existed. Prior to the 90-days elapsing, the parties reached an oral agreement and BTT sent Chou an e-mail titled “Strat Deal” covering the key terms of the distribution agreement reaffirming the oral agreement. This e-mail does not constitute a contract for several reasons. First, this was part of the negotiation process and Chou failed to draft the contract to “memorialize" the

The truth that both sides were interacting by email didn't have an effect on my research into the case. E-mail is actually a type of electronic interaction, not a penned and signed agreement. While both sides might have conveyed their intention and conditions of the agreement, they never printed and inked any type of a written deal. This element makes all the variation with regards to enforceable agreements. What BTT and a Chou had wasn't a binding or enforceable agreement.

Contractual agreements are supposed to be consensual, and freely entered into by the parties involved. Therefore, ‘before a court enforces a relationship as a contract, the courts must have a reasonably certain basis in fact to justify binding the parties to each other.’ (St. John’s Law Scholarship Repository, no date). Resolution of whether a contract was intended to be legally binding is not determined by what the parties themselves thought or intended. Rather, a more objective stance is taken by the courts. This is known as the objective theory of contract, and essentially enables ‘the courts to look at external evidence (what the parties said and did at the time)’ (Poole, 2006, p. 34), as to objectively indicate the parties’ intentions

Before unilateral contracts come into place, contract law is about a promise for a promise. Cases such as Carlill v Carbonic Smoke Ball Co. have shown how the contract law has adapted to accommodate this form of contract. Judges seek to identify consideration and acceptance in unilateral contracts whilst managing to achieve a balance between protecting reasonable expectation of an honest man and retaining respect for the sanctity of contract.