Was The Breach Of Contract?

Most time, acceptance would be made in clear and loud matters, such as saying “Yes, I accept.” But silence would constitute acceptance of an offer where the common-law and statutory law allows. Supreme Court of Nebraska has confirmed in Joseph Heiting and Sons v. Jacks Bean Co that acceptance may be established by silence or inaction of an offeree and acceptance occurs when the buyer/offeree “does any act inconsistent with the seller/offeror’s ownership...” Neb. U.C.C. section 2-606(1)(c). In Joseph Heiting and Sons v. Jacks Bean Co, 463 N.W.2d 817, 236 Neb. 765 (Neb.,1990), Heiting (Plaintiff) offered to sell its beans at the posted price on September 30, 1987, but was never informed of acceptance or rejection of the offer. Heiting and Jacks

Tech Ltd hired extra electricians and worked longer hours to complete the installation as agreed on 20th December.

Firstly, we have to distinguish whether Jack makes an invitation to tender or an invitation to treat. According to Harvela Investments Ltd v. Royal Trust Co of Canada (CI) Ltd (1986), the usual analysis is that ‘an invitation to tender for a particular project is simply an invitation to treat. ' However, in the case of Harvela Investments Ltd, the invitation to tender is treated as an offer implicating legal obligations. I believe that Jack was making an invitation to treat rather than an invitation to tender, constituting an offer, for several reasons; firstly, the terms of the invitation are vague, with no specification of time for which acceptance of the ‘most competitive tender ' will remain open till; secondly, I infer that the lack

1. Did Wayne have an employment contract, either oral or written, with EcoCare? Why or why not?

Either Cedric could claim for damages as a priorly victim stating that the the defendant could have foreseen that the incident which caused the fire alarm to go off could have given Cedric personal injury, whether it is physical or mentally injury does not matter. But, most likely Cedric wouldn't be able to sue as a primary victim based on the decision in Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co Ltd (2007). In this case it was held that the claimant couldn't sue even though the Page v Smith principle was applied because the defendants could not have foreseen the claimants reaction. Applying this case authority onto the problem question regarding Cedric I would advise the Saveloy Hotel company to that Cedric´s claim as a primary victim is not likely to succed. Reasoning for this is because the hotel company could not have foreseen that Cedric´s reaction to the fire alarm, which in itself was a reaction to the fire. The hotel company could not foresee that Cedric would think that the hotel was being attacked by aliens, which is the reason of why his mental illness

The validity of an oral contract depends on the jurisdiction, in most cases they are treated like any written one, but some situations (such as when exchanging real property) may require physical evidence such as a written agreement to back up the oral one. For oral contracts to hold water (become enforceable) they must be done correctly, like making sure there is a witness to the deal-making.

2. Applying the facts you have from the case problem above only, lay out a case for negligence against the hotel. Use the elements to outline the case. Start with the first element, explain what facts you have for or against that element, and then continue through the five elements of negligence. If you do not have enough facts to make your case, explain what facts you would need to have in order to support a case of negligence. (Points : 10)

This additional evidence showed that Days Inn did not exercise ordinary care in keeping the premises safe. The court concluded that the prior criminal activity was sufficiently substantially similar to Matt’s incident and the landowner was negligent in not taking reasonable precautions to protect its guests. Id. at 795

In the review of the case of Sam Stevens concerning the agreement to deliver 1,000 units of a dog barking machine, an evaluation will be made to determine if a valid contract was created and if a quasi-contract or a promissory estoppel was formed. Also, Sam has received an eviction notice from his apartment due to noise complaints, and for running an illegal business. Therefore, the rights and obligations under the lease agreement will be evaluated to determine if Quinn had grounds and defense against the eviction.

Defendant SARAH MINER (hereinafter “Ms. Miner,”) owner, and operator of the Portola complex, recently denied Plaintiff DARLAWILLIAMS’ (hereinafter “Plaintiff,”) a former tenant, application to continue leasing at the complex. As such, Plaintiff brought several suits (Exhibit 1) against Ms. Miner, alleging discrimination as the basis for her denial. The Plaintiff's case against Ms. Miner, however, is without merits. Plaintiff received several noise complaints (Exhibit 2) throughout her tenancy, disrupting the peaceful residential community. Moreover, Plaintiff failed to keep her unit in good condition, resulting in considerable damage to the unit and property.

Bernie a resident of Richmond, Virginia decides to sale his 2006 Ford Fusion for $13,000.00 and places an ad in his local newspaper on February 1st. After several weeks without any inquiries, Vivian contacts Bernie on March 1st stating she will pay him $12,000.00 for the car. Bernie arranges to meet with Vivian on March 5th to complete the deal. Vivian comes to Bernie’s house on March 10th and says she will give Bernie $12,500.00 for the car; but she needs three additional weeks to come up with the money. Bernie agrees but only if Vivian puts down a deposit. Vivian agrees and Bernie drafts an agreement stated the sale will must take place no later than March 31st. Vivian reads and signs the agreement and

The enforcement of the contract against the Smiths is unconscionable because the contract between the Smiths and Star Rent-to-Own involves gross disparity and overreaching/oppressive influences. Star has taken an unfair advantage of the Smith’s dependence, economic distress, and inexperience. During the execution of the contract, not all information was presented to the defendants and this played a major role in convincing them to enter into the contract. This brief is filed in support of the defendants Alex and Sandra Smith, showing the contract to be unconscionable.

Kyran Murphy felt that the Holiday Inn should be held accountable for her injuries because they were sustained in a Holiday Inn Inc. motel.  Murphy felt that the “defendant, its agents, and employees, so carelessly, recklessly, and negligently maintained the premise of the motel” that caused

Peter booked a room for a week at Macgregor Hotel. At the reception desk, where he made the booking, was a notice limiting the hotel’s liability for loss of, damage to guest’s property.

Introduction: In this assignment I will go over a few legal terms in relation to contract law. I will also talk about a few precedents that help explain the law.