ConLracLs CuLllne

8emedylng 8reach
kestatement 344 1he goal and purpose of proLecLlng a promlsee's expecLaLlon lnLeresL ln Lo puL Lhe
promlsee ln as good a poslLlon as he would have been ln had Lhe conLracL been performed"
Un|ted States Nava| Inst|tute v Charter Commun|cat|ons Inc
lacLs naval granLed 8erkley Lhe excluslve llcense Lo publlsh a paperback edlLlon of Lhe book noL sooner
Lhan CcLober buL Lhey were shlpped early anyway
8ule ln calculaLlng Lhe amounL of damages ln a breach of conLracL case focus on Lhe 's loss noL on Lhe
u's galn and remember LhaL Lhe cenLral ob[ecLlve behlnd Lhe sysLem of conLracL remedles ls
compensaLory noL punlLlve
Su|||van v C'Connor
lacLs uocLor promlsed Lhe LhaL ln Lwo operaLlons he would make her nose shorLer and more pleaslng
ln relaLlon Lo her oLher feaLures Pavlng falled he performed a Lhlrd remalned dlsflgured and her
appearance could noL be lmproved by more surgery
8ule ome courLs vlew Lhe promlse by a physlclan llke an ordlnary commerclal promlse and permlL a
successful plalnLlff Lo recover expecLancy damages LxpecLancy damages are measured by an amounL of
money lnLended Lo puL Lhe plalnLlff ln Lhe poslLlon he would have been ln had Lhe conLracL been
performed lnsLead of expecLancy damages a successful plalnLlff may elecL resLlLuLlon damages
8esLlLuLlon damages are measured by an amounL of money correspondlng Lo any beneflL conferred by
Lhe plalnLlff upon Lhe defendanL ln Lhe performance of Lhe conLracL dlsrupLed by Lhe defendanL's
breach Pere Lhe courL found resLlLuLlon damages Lo be Loo meager
Jh|te v 8enkowsk|
lacLs WhlLes buy a house lacklng lLs own waLer supply 1hey conLracL wlLh Lhe nelghbors Lo use Lhelr
waLer supply for $3/mo lus Lo spllL any cosLs perLalnlng Lo malnLalned or repalrs Lo Lhe well
8elaLlonshlp began as frlendly buL qulckly deLerloraLed u Lurned waLer off mulLlple Llmes (9) and
clalmed Lhey were remlndlng Lhe WhlLes waLer use was excesslve and also Lo seLLle Lhe sand ln Lhe
plpes CourL flnds LhaL Lhe WhlLes Lurned Lhe waLer off mallclously
8ule Ceneral rule sLaLes LhaL punlLlve damages are noL recoverable for breach of conLracL Lven lf Lhe
breach ls wlllful you sLlll cannoL collecL punlLlve damages
L||en L|ectron|ca rob|em Need to |ook over
Genera| Damage Iormu|a MarkeL prlce mlnus prlce conLracLed for

Cover Iormu|a ln Lhe case of cover Lhe buyer ls enLlLled Lo damages of Lhe dlfference beLween Lhe
conLracL goods and Lhe subsLlLuLe goods plus lncldenLal and consequenLlal damages buL less any
expenses saved due Lo Lhe breach by Lhe seller
kesa|e and Cover
Se||er's kemed|es and kesa|e An lndex secLlon whlch gaLhers LogeLher ln one convenlenL place
all of Lhe varlous remedles open Lo a seller for any breach by Lhe buyer More Lhan one may be
avallable and you wlll have Lo look aL Lhe facLs and deLermlne Lhe mosL approprlaLe remedy
UCC 2703 Se||er's kemed|es |n Genera| Where Lhe buyer wrongfully re[ecLs or revokes accepLance of
goods or falls Lo make a paymenL due on or before dellvery or repudlaLes wlLh respecL Lo a parL or Lhe
whole Lhen wlLh respecL Lo any goods dlrecLly affecLed and lf Lhe breach ls of Lhe whole conLracL
(ecLlon 2612) Lhen also wlLh respecL Lo Lhe whole undellvered balance Lhe aggrleved seller may
a) WlLhhold dellvery of goods
b) Lop dellvery by any ballee as hereafLer provlded (ecLlon 2703)
c) roceed under Lhe nexL secLlon respecLlng goods sLlll unldenLlfled Lo Lhe conLracL
d) 8esell and recover damages as hereafLer provlded (ecLlon 2706)
e) 8ecover damages for nonaccepLance (ecLlon 2708) or ln a proper case Lhe prlce (ecLlon 2
709)
f) cancel
UCC 2706 Se||er's kesa|e Inc|ud|ng Contract for kesa|e
1) Dnder Lhe condlLlons sLaLed ln ecLlon 2703 on seller's remedles Lhe seller may resell Lhe
goods concerned or undellverable balance Lhereof Where Lhe resale ls made ln good falLh and
ln commerclally reasonable manner Lhe seller may recover Lhe dlfference beLween Lhe resale
prlce and Lhe conLracL prlce LogeLher wlLh any lncldenLal damages allowed under Lhe provlslons
of Lhls ArLlcle (ecLlon 2710) buL less expenses saved ln consequence of Lhe buyer's breach
2) LxcepL as oLherwlse provlded ln subsecLlon (3) or unless oLherwlse agreed resale may be aL
publlc or prlvaLe sale lncludlng sale by way of one or more conLracLs Lo sell or of ldenLlflcaLlon Lo
an exlsLlng conLracL of Lhe seller ale may be as a unlL or parcels and aL any Llme and place and
on any Lerms buL every aspecL of Lhe sale lncludlng Lhe meLhod manner Llme place and Lerms
musL be commerclally reasonable 1he resale musL be reasonably ldenLlfled as referrlng Lo Lhe
broken conLracL buL lL ls noL necessary LhaL Lhe goods be ln exlsLence or LhaL any or all of Lhem
have been ldenLlfled Lo Lhe conLracL before Lhe breach
3) Where Lhe resale ls aL prlvaLe sale Lhe seller musL glve Lhe buyer reasonable noLlflcaLlon of hls
lnLenLlon Lo resell
) Where Lhe resale ls aL publlc sale
a Cnly ldenLlfled goods can be sold excepL where Lhere ls a recognlzed markey for a publlc
sale of fuLures ln goods of Lhe klnd and
b lL musL be made aL a usual place or markeL for publlc sale lf one ls reasonably avallable
and excepL ln Lhe case of goods whlch are perlshable or LhreaLen Lo declde ln value
speedlly Lhe seller musL Lhe buyer reasonable noLlce of Lhe Llme and place of Lhe resale
and
c lf Lhe goods are noL Lo be wlLhln Lhe vlew of Lhose aLLendlng Lhe sale Lhe noLlflcaLlon of
sale musL sLaLe Lhe place where Lhee goods are locaLed and provlde for Lhelr reasonable
lnspecLlon by prospecLlve bldder and
d 1he seller may buy
3) A purchaser who buys ln good falLh aL a resale Lakes Lhe goods free of any rlghLs of Lhe orlglnal
buyer even Lhough Lhe seller falls Lo comply wlLh one or more of Lhe requlremenLs of Lhls
secLlon
6) 1he seller ls noL accounLable Lo Lhe buyer for any proflL made on any resale A person ln Lhe
poslLlon of a seller (ecLlon 2707) or a buyer who has rlghLfully re[ecLed Lo [usLlflably revoke
accepLance musL accounL for any excess over Lhe amounL of hls securlLy lnLeresL as herelnafLer
deflned (subsecLlon (3) of ecLlon 2711)
UCC 2708 A Se||er's Damages for NonAcceptance or kepud|at|on (1) ub[ecL Lo subsecLlon (2) and
Lo Lhe provlslons of Lhls ArLlcle wlLh respecL Lo proof or markeL prlce (ecLlon 2723) Lhe measure of
damages for nonaccepLance or repudlaLlon by Lhe buyer ls Lhe dlfference beLween Lhe markeL prlce aL
Lhe Llme and place for Lender and Lhe unpald conLracL prlce LogeLher wlLh any lncldenLal damages
provlded ln Lhls ArLlcle (ecLlon 2710) buL less expenses saved ln consequences of Lhe buyer's breach
8uyer's kemed|es and Covet
UCC 2711 8uyer's kemed|es |n Genera| 8uyer's Secur|ty Interest |n ke[ected Goods
1) Where Lhe seller falls Lo make dellvery or repudlaLes or Lhe buyer rlghLfully re[ecLs or [usLlflably
revokes accepLance Lhen wlLh respecL Lo any good lnvolved and wlLh respecL Lo Lhe whole lf Lhe
breach goes Lo Lhe whole conLracL (ecLlon 2612) Lhe buyer may cancel and wheLher or noL he
has done so may addlLlon Lo recoverlng so much of Lhe prlce as has been pald
a) cover" and have damages under Lhe nexL secLlon as Lo all Lhe goods affecLed wheLher or
noL Lhey have been ldenLlfled ln Lhe conLracL or
b) 8ecover damages for nondellvery as provlded ln Lhls ArLlcle (ecLlon 2713)
2) Where Lhe seller falls Lo dellver or repudlaLes Lhe buyer may also
a lf Lhe goods have been ldenLlfled recover Lhem as provlded ln Lhls ArLlcle (ecLlon 2
302) or
b ln a proper case obLaln speclflc performance or replevy Lhe goods as provlded ln Lhls
ArLlcle (ecLlon 2716)
3) Cn rlghLful re[ecLlon or [usLlflable revocaLlon of accepLance a buyer has a securlLy lnLeresL ln
good ln hls possesslon or conLrol for any paymenLs made on Lhelr prlce and any expenses
reasonably lncurred ln Lhelr lnspecLlon recelpL LransporLaLlon care and cusLody and may hold
such goods and resell Lhem ln llke manner as an aggrleved seller (ecLlon 2706)
UCC 2712 "Cover" 8uyer's rocurement of Subst|tute Goods
1) AfLer a breach wlLhln Lhe precedlng secLlon Lhe buyer may cover" by maklng ln good falLh and
wlLhouL unreasonable delay any reasonable purchase of or conLracL Lo purchase goods ln
subsLlLuLlon for Lhose due from Lhe seller
2) 1he buyer may recover from Lhe seller as damages Lhe dlfference beLween Lhe cover of cover
and Lhe conLracL prlce LogeLher wlLh any lncldenLal or consequenLlal damages as herelnafLer
deflned (ecLlon 2713) buL less expenses saved ln consequences of Lhe seller's breach
3) lallure of Lhe buyer Lo effecL cover wlLhln Lhls secLlon does noL bar hlm from any oLher remedy

UCC 2713 8uyer's Damages for NonDe||very or kepud|at|on
1) ub[ecL Lo Lhe provlslons of Lhls ArLlcle wlLh respecL Lo proof of markeL prlce (ecLlon 2723) Lhe
measure of damages for nondellvery or repudlaLlon by Lhe seller ls Lhe dlfference beLween Lhe
markeL prlce aL Lhe Llme when Lhe buyer learned of Lhe breach and Lhe conLracL prlced LogeLher
wlLh any lncldenLal and consequenLlal damages provlded ln Lhls ArLlcle (ecLlon 2713) buL less
expenses saved ln consequence of Lhe seller's breach
2) MarkeL prlce ls Lo be deLermlned as of Lhe place for Lender or ln cases of re[ecLlon afLer arrlval
or revocaLlon of accepLance as of Lhe place of arrlval
Laredo n|des Co Inc v nn Meat roducts Co Inc
lacLs A wrlLLen conLracL was slgned by Lhe Lwo companles whlch promlsed LhaL seller would dellver lLs
enLlre hlde producLlon wlLhln a speclfled perlod of Llme Lo buyer eller dld noL recelve paymenL from
buyer due Lo a mall delay eller lmmedlaLely ceased Lo fulflll resL of conLracL 8uyer had Lo purchase
hldes aL a slgnlflcanLly hlgher markeL raLe ln order Lo saLlsfy lLs conLracL wlLh a Lhlrd parLy
8ule lf Lhe seller's breach ls un[usLlfled Lhen Lhe buyer ls enLlLled Lo (uamages for breach of conLracL)
(markeL prlce aL breach or acLual cosL of cover) (conLracL prlce) + (lncldenLal and consequenLlal
damages) (2712)
Spec|f|c erformance and Cther Lqu|tab|e ke||ef
UCC 2709 Act|on for the r|ce
1) When Lhe buyer falls Lo pay Lhe prlce as lL becomes due Lhe seller may recover LogeLher wlLh
any lncldenLal damages under Lhe nexL secLlon Lhe prlce
a Cf goods accepLed or of conformlng goods losL or damages wlLhln a commerclally
reasonable Llme afLer rlsk of Lhelr loss has passed Lo Lhe buyer and
b Cf goods ldenLlfled Lo Lhe conLracL lf Lhe seller ls unable afLer reasonable efforL Lo resell
Lhem aL a reasonable prlce or Lhe clrcumsLances reasonably lndlcaLe LhaL such efforL wlll
be unavalllng
2) Where Lhe seller sues for Lhe prlce he musL hold for Lhe buyer any goods whlch have been
ldenLlfled Lo Lhe conLracL and are sLlll ln hls conLrol excepL LhaL lf resale becomes posslble he
may resell Lhem aL any Llme prlor Lo Lhe collecLlon for Lhe [udgmenL 1he neL proceeds of any
such resale musL be credlLed Lo Lhe buyer and paymenL of Lhe [udgmenL enLlLles hlm Lo any
goods noL resold
3) AfLer Lhe buyer has wrongfully re[ecLed or revoked accepLance of Lhe goods or has falled Lo
make a paymenL due or has repudlaLed (ecLlon 2610) a seller who ls held noL enLlLled Lo Lhe
prlce under Lhls secLlon shall neverLheless be awarded damages for nonaccepLance under Lhe
precedlng secLlon
UCC 2716 8uyer's k|ght to Spec|f|c erformance and kep|ev|n
1) peclflc performance may be decreed where Lhe goods are unlque or ln oLher proper
clrcumsLances
2) 1he decree for speclflc performance may lnclude such Lerms and condlLlons as Lo paymenL of
Lhe prlce damages or oLher rellef as Lhe courL may deem [usL
3) 1he buyer has a rlghL of replevln for goods ldenLlfled Lo Lhe conLracL lf afLer reasonable efforL he
ls unable Lo effecL cover for such goods or Lhe clrcumsLances reasonably lndlcaLe LhaL such
efforL wlll be unavalllng or lf Lhe goods have been shlpped under reservaLlon and saLlsfacLlon of
Lhe securlLy lnLeresL ln Lhem has been made or Lendered ln Lhe case of goods boughL for
personal famlly or household purposes Lhe buyer's rlghL of replevln vesLs upon acqulslLlon of a
speclal properLy even lf Lhe seller had noL Lhen repudlaLed or falled Lo dellver
k|e|n v eps|Co Inc
lacLs sued for speclflc performance on Lhe sale of a CulfsLream Cll corporaLe [eL LhaL a broker was Lo
purchase u clalmed noL Lo have formed a conLracL for Lhe sale of Lhe [eL Lo D a conLenLlon LhaL D
dlsagrees wlLh
8ule peclflc performance ls approprlaLe where Lhe goods are unlque ln oLher proper clrcumsLances"
Clven Lhe LesLlmony LhaL Lhere were Lhree comparable Cll's on Lhe markeL Lhe lourLh ClrculL CourL of
Appeals held LhaL Lhe alrcrafL was noL so unlque as Lo merlL an order of speclflc performance As oLher
proper clrcumsLances" lalnLlff clLed prlce lncreases ln Cll's whlch caused hlm Lo purchase a Clll rlce
lncreases are no reason Lo order speclflc performance Money damages would clearly be adequaLe
Lac|ede Gas Co v Amoco C|| Co
lacLs lalnLlff and uefendanL formed a conLracL LhaL lalnLlff agreed Lo buy and uefendanL agreed Lo
sell all Lhe propane lL needed Lo supply cerLaln subdlvlslons ln efferson CounLy Mlssourl 1he prlce was
Lo be Lhe Wood 8lver Area osLed rlce 1he conLracL also conLalned a clause allowlng lalnLlff Lo
LermlnaLe Lhe conLracL afLer one year lf lalnLlff so deslred and leavlng LhaL opLlon open ln Lhe fuLure
1here was no such clause for uefendanL AfLer some dlsagreemenLs and problems uefendanL lnformed
lalnLlff LhaL uefendanL would noL supply propane for lalnLlff any more lalnLlff sued uefendanL 1he
Lrlal [udge ruled ln favor of uefendanL on Lhe basls of lack of muLuallLy (conslderaLlon) 1he courL
clalmed LhaL slnce lalnLlff could resclnd Lhe conLracL aL wlll buL uefendanL could noL Lhe conLracL was
noL blndlng
8ule peclflc performance ls enforceable where publlc lnLeresL ls lnvolved
Jhat rom|ses J||| 1he Law Lnforce? Cons|derat|on ke||ance kest|tut|on
Iundamenta|s
namer v S|dway Jhy |s |t un||atera|?
lacLs Wllllam L Lory and hls nephew Wllllam L Lory ll agreed LhaL Lhe uncle would pay hls nephew
$3k lf Lhe nephew would refraln from drlnklng uslng Lobacco swearlng and playlng cards and bllllards
for money unLll he Lurned 21 When Lhe nephew Lurned 21 hls uncle senL hlm a leLLer LhaL lndlcaLed
LhaL Lhe nephew had earned Lhe $3k and LhaL he would hold Lhe money wlLh lnLeresL unLll Lhe nephew
became capable of raklng of lL responslbly 1he nephew accepLed Lhe Lerms 1he uncle dled Lwelve
years laLer wlLhouL havlng Lransferred Lhe funds Lo hls nephew
8ule lorbearance ls conslderaLlon 1he mere absLenLlon from a permlsslble legal conducL ls sufflclenL
conslderaLlon Lo make a promlse based on LhaL forbearance a valld conLracL ConslderaLlon ls noL
measured as a beneflL Lo Lhe promlsor 1he courL sLaLed LhaL conslderaLlon may conslsL ln elLher some
rlghL lnLeresL proflL or beneflL Lo one parLy or some forbearance deLrlmenL loss or responslblllLy
glven suffered or underLaken by Lhe oLher lL ls lmmaLerlal wheLher Lhe conslderaLlon does ln facL
beneflL Lhe promlse or a Lhlrd parLy or ls of subsLanLlal value Lo anyone 8efralnlng from someLhlng LhaL
one ls enLlLled Lo do ls a sufflclenL deLrlmenL Lo creaLe an enforceable conLracL
Dnder 8esLaLemenL 2
nd
32 lf an offer ls amblguous lL can be accepLed by a promlse or acLual
performance lf accepLance ls Lhrough performance Lhe conLracL ls unllaLeral lf Lhrough promlse Lhe
conLracL ls bllaLeral
I|ege v 8oehm
lacLs 8oehm became pregnanL and belleved ln good falLh LhaL llege was Lhe faLher llege promlsed Lo
pay 8oehm for Lhe blrLh expenses and make supporL paymenLs for Lhe ralslng of Lhe chlld as long as
8oehm would lnsLlLuLe crlmlnal basLardy proceedlngs agalnsL hlm llege made paymenLs under Lhe
agreemenL buL sLopped when blood LesLs revealed LhaL he could noL be Lhe faLher 8oehm lnlLlaLed
crlmlnal basLardy proceedlngs and llege was acqulLLed because Lhe blood LesLs revealed LhaL he could
noL have been Lhe faLher
8ule lorbearance from asserLlng a good falLh legal clalm can be valld conslderaLlon
lorbearance from asserLlng a legal clalm known Lo be lnvalld ls noL valuable conslderaLlon 1o be valld
conslderaLlon Lhe clalmanL musL sub[ecLlvely belleve ln good falLh LhaL Lhe clalm ls valld and LhaL bellef
musL be reasonable from Lhe sLandpolnL of a reasonable person ln Lhe poslLlon of Lhe clalmanL
Ie|nberg v fe|ffer Co
lacLs lelnberg worked for felffer for 37 years ln 197 Lhe 8oard of ulrecLors adopLed a resoluLlon
recognlzlng lelnberg's long and falLhful servlce by lncreaslng her salary from $30 Lo $00 per monLh
and offerlng her $200 per monLh for llfe afLer reLlremenL lelnberg reLlred a years and a half laLer and
recelved $200 per monLh for several years 1he reLlremenL plan was a ma[or facLs ln her declslon Lo
reLlre everal years laLer a new presldenL of felffer Co declded Lhe paymenLs were mere graLulLles
and noLlfled lelnberg LhaL her paymenLs would be reduced Lo $100 per monLh lelnberg refused Lo
accepL Lhe reduced amounL and felffer LermlnaLed all paymenLs
8ule ConslderaLlon may be elLher a beneflL Lo Lhe promlsor or a deLrlmenL Lo Lhe promlse 1he courL
held LhaL Lhe docLrlne of promlssory esLoppel (1he rlnclple LhaL a promlse wlLhouL conslderaLlon may
noneLheless be enforced Lo prevenL ln[usLlce lf Lhe promlsor should have reasonably expecL d Lhe
promlsee Lo rely on Lhe promlse and lf Lhe promlsee dld acLually rely on Lhe promlse Lo hls or her
deLrlmenL)supporLed lelnberg's acLlon 1he acLlon was lnduced was lelnberg's reLlremenL from a
lucraLlve poslLlon ln rellance on felffer's promlse Lo pay her a penslon lelnberg [usLlflably relled on
felffer's promlse by reLlrlng earller Lhan she had planned 1he courL held LhaL by reLlrlng lelnberg's
rellance upon Lhe promlse conLalned ln Lhe resoluLlon creaLed an enforceable conLracL under Lhe
docLrlne of promlssory esLoppel 1hls ls valued aL Lhe Llme Lhe conLracL was made
k|rskey v k|rskey
lacLs 1he u's husband and her son dled 1he reslded on publlc land and was comforLably seLLled and
would have aLLempLed Lhe land she llved on 1he broLher of her now dead husband wroLe Lo her and
asked her Lo llve on hls land WlLhln a monLh or Lwo of recelvlng Lhls leLLer Lhe u moved Lo reslde on Lhe
resldence of Lhe u 1he u Lhen klcked Lhem ouL afLer a llLLle whlle
8ule 1he leLLer was a mere graLulLy and Lherefore Lhere ls no cause of acLlon
Strong v Sheff|e|d
lacLs heffleld endorsed and dellvered a promlssory noLe Lo Lrong as securlLy for adebL owend by
heffleld's husband Lo Lrong 1he only conslderaLlon heffleld recelved was an agreemenL Lo forbear
Lhe debL for an lndeflnlLe perlod of Llme Lrong Lold heffleld l wlll hold lL unLll such Llme as l wasn'L
my money l wlll make a demand on you for lL" Lrong demanded paymenL Lwo years laLer and
heffleld was unable Lo pay
8ule A promlse ls lllusory lf a parLy's performance ls enLlrely aL Lhe opLlon of LhaL parLy
ln order Lo be enforceable a conLracL musL be supporLed by conslderaLlon ln order Lo serve as valld
conslderaLlon forbearance musL be elLher absoluLe or for a deflnlLe Llme or for a reasonable Llme
lorbearance for a llLLle or for some Llme ls noL sufflclenL 1he only quallflcaLlon ls LhaL ln Lhe absence
of a speclfled Llme a reasonable Llme ls deemed Lo have been lnLended
ConslderaLlon musL be deLermlned by Lhe agreemenL lLself noL by whaL acLually Lransplres
Matte| v nopper
lacLs MaLLel a real esLaLe developer soughL Lo purchase properLy owned by Popper for a new shopplng
cenLer MaLLel accepLed Popper's offer Lo sell for $37300 Dnder Lhe agreemenL MaLLel was requlred
Lo deposlL $1000 wlLh a real esLaLe agenL and had 120 days Lo examlne Lhe LlLle and consummaLe Lhe
purchase aL whlch Llme Lhe balance of Lhe purchase prlce was due 1he agreemenL also conLalned a
personal saLlsfacLlon clause whereby MaLLel was excused from performance lf he was unable Lo arrange
saLlsfacLory leases of space ln Lhe shopplng cenLer 8efore Lhe 120 days had elapsed Popper's aLLorney
noLlfled maLLer LhaL she would noL sell her land under Lhe Lerms of Lhe agreemenL Popper refused Lo
compleLe Lhe LransacLlon and MaLLel sued for breach of conLracL Popper clalmed LhaL Lhe personal
saLlsfacLlon clause rendered Lhe conLracL lllusory
8ule When Lhe parLles aLLempL Lo make a conLracL where promlses are exchanged as Lhe conslderaLlon
Lhe promlses musL be muLual ln obllgaLlon An agreemenL LhaL lacks muLuallLy of obllgaLlon lacks
conslderaLlon and ls unenforceable MuLuallLy of obllgaLlon exlsLs when boLh parLles have assumed
some legal obllgaLlon lf Lhe agreemenL leaves on parLy free Lo perform or Lo wlLhdraw from Lhe
agreemenL aL hls own unresLrlcLed pleasure Lhe promlse ls lllusory and lacks conslderaLlon
Jood v Lucy Lady DuffGordon
lacLs Lady uuffCordon conLracLed Lo glve Wood an excluslve rlghL Lo markeL and llcense all of her
deslgns and Lo endorse deslgns wlLh her name 1he excluslve conLracL requlred LhaL Lhey spllL all proflLs
from Wood's sales evenly buL Lhere was no express clause LhaL sLaLed LhaL he would perform Lucy
placed endorsemenLs on cloLhes wlLhouL Wood's knowledge and ln vlolaLlon of Lhe conLracL and Wood
sued
8ule A promlse Lo use reasonable efforLs may be lmplled from Lhe enLlre clrcumsLances of a conLracL
1he duLy of good falLh can compensaLe for vagueness ln an agreemenL Lo avold lnvalldaLlon of a conLracL
clearly lnLended by Lhe parLles
ke||ance
k|cketts v Scothorn
lacLs 1he grandfaLher of Lhe creaLed a noLe whlch allowed for Lhe Lo noL have Lo work anymore
ConsequenLly Lhe lmmedlaLely lnformed her employer of her lnLenLlon Lo qulL lor more Lhan a year
Lhe was wlLhouL an occupaLlon buL afLer some Llme she acqulred as a book keeper 8lckeLLs dled ln
une 189 and Lhe execuLor of hls esLaLe refused paymenL clalmlng LhaL 8lckeLLs' promlse lacked
conslderaLlon and was Lherefore a graLulLy and noL an enforceable promlse 1he Lrlal courL found ln
favor of coLhorn and 8lckeLLs' esLaLe appealed
8ule AlLhough a promlse glven wlLhouL conslderaLlon ordlnarlly does noL creaLe a blndlng conLracL Lhe
docLrlne of promlssory esLoppel prevenLs a promlsee from uslng lack of conslderaLlon as a defense Lo
breach of conLracL ConsequenLly a promlse can be enforced even Lhough lL was glven wlLhouL
conslderaLlon lf Lhe promlsee has reasonably relled on Lhe promlse Lo her deLrlmenL
Pere Lhe courL consldered Lhe magnlLude of coLhorn's good falLh rellance on her grandfaLher's
promlse and held LhaL her acLlons were conslsLenL wlLh LhaL rellance and Lherefore consLlLuLed a
sufflclenL conslderaLlon
ke||ance
Ie|nberg v fe|ffer 2
lacLs lelnberg worked for felffer for 37 years ln 197 Lhe 8oard of ulrecLors adopLed a resoluLlon
recognlzlng lelnberg's long and falLhful servlce by lncreaslng her salary from $30 Lo $00 per monLh
and offerlng her $200 per monLh for llfe afLer reLlremenL lelnberg reLlred a years and a half laLer and
recelved $200 per monLh for several years 1he reLlremenL plan was a ma[or facLs ln her declslon Lo
reLlre everal years laLer a new presldenL of felffer Co declded Lhe paymenLs were mere graLulLles
and noLlfled lelnberg LhaL her paymenLs would be reduced Lo $100 per monLh lelnberg refused Lo
accepL Lhe reduced amounL and felffer LermlnaLed all paymenLs
8ule lf a promlse ls made and Lhe relles on LhaL promlse Lhen lL ls enforceable
kest|tut|on
Cotnam v J|sdom
lacLs 1he deceased was Lhrown from a sLreeL car he hlL hls head on Lhe curve and was unconsclous
1wo physlclans performed surgery on Lhe deceased whlle he was unconsclous buL Lhe s were unable Lo
save hls llfe 1he u admlnlsLraLor of Lhe deceased dld noL pay Lhe s for Lhelr servlces because Lhe u
argues LhaL slnce Lhe deceased was unconsclous no conLracL was made beLween Lhe deceased and Lhe
s
8ule 1he s can recover under a quaslconLracL (aka lmplled conLracL) ubllc pollcy says LhaL u8s can
recover for servlces rendered durlng an emergency
Ca||ano v Cakwood ark nomes Corp
lacLs 8ruce endergasLs boughL a home from Cakwood ark Pomes lnc 1he house was erecLed oon
afLer endergasLs conLracLed wlLh a nursery (Callano) Lo puL shrubs ln hls fronL yard for a prlce of
$9793 8efore endergasLs slgned Lhe conLracL for hls home he passed away and Lhe flowers were
already planLed A represenLaLlve of Cakwood was aware of Lhe planLlng oong afLer Lhe conLracL was
volded and Lhe home was laLer sold Lo someone else s conLend LhaL Lhe u was un[usLly enrlched
when Lhe u conLracLed Lo purchase Lhe properLy was cancelled and LhaL an agreemenL Lo pay for Lhe
shrubbery ls lmplled by law
8ule A 's remedy ls agalnsL endergrasL's esLaLe slnce Lhey conLracLed wlLh hlm and he was Lhe one
recelvlng Lhe beneflLs A ls noL enLlLled Lo employ Lhe legal flclon of Cuasl conLracL Lo subsLlLuLe one
romlse or debLor for anoLher now lf Lhere ls a fraud you may be able Lo recover ln anoLher case
Contract Iormat|on
Lucy v 2ehmer
lacLs AfLer several drlnks Zehmer wroLe a conLracL on a resLauranL blll ln whlch he agreed Lo sell hls
farm Lo Lucy for $30000 Zehmer laLer lnslsLed LhaL he had been lnLoxlcaLed and LhoughL Lhe maLLer
was a [oke noL reallzlng LhaL Lucy had been serlous
8ule 1he LesL ls wheLher a reasonable person would conclude LhaL Lhe person's words and acLlons
consLlLuLed an offer
Cwen v 1un|son
lacLs Cwen wroLe Lo 1unlson Lo lnqulre wheLher he would sell hls 8radley block and loL for $6000
1unlson replled LhaL lL would noL be posslble for me Lo sell lL unless l was Lo recelve $16000 cash
1unlson noLed LhaL Lhe bulldlng was ln flrsL class condlLlon wroLe Lo u Lo accepL Lhe offer u clalmed
LhaL he had noL made an offer and refused Lo sell Lhe properLy
8ule A mere sLaLemenLs of mlnlmum selllng prlce ls noL an offer Lo sell real properLy 1he language lL
would noL be posslble for me Lo sell unless l was Lo recelve $16000 cash" was Loo general and dld noL
consLlLuLe an offer 1he courL held LhaL Lhere can be no conLracL for Lhe sale of properLy no meeLlng of
Lhe mlnds of Lhe owner and prospecLlve purchase unless Lhere has been an offer or proposal of sale
Ia|rmount G|ass Jorks v CrudenMart|n woodenware Co
lacLs lalrmounL senL a leLLer do u asklng for advlce as Lo Lhe lowesL prlce u replles wlLh a quoLe and
ends wlLh for lmmedlaLe accepLance" replles asklng for 10 car loads u replles wlLh lmposslble Lo
book order" sues for breach of conLracL
8ule ln an exchange of leLLers lnqulrlng abouL a posslble conLracL sLrong language LhaL hlnLs LhaL a
conLracL wlll be made upon accepLance wlll e consldered Lo be an accepLance lf Lhe respondlng parLy
accepLs
Cffers and Acceptance
Craft v L|der Iohnson Co
lacLs 1he aLLempLed Lo purchase an lLem LhaL was adverLlsed by Lhe us as 1hursday Cnly peclal
all elecLrlc sewlng machlnes for $2600" 1he us refused Lo fulflll Lhe offer
8ule An adverLlsemenL ls noL an offer buL an offerLonegoLlaLe
Lefkow|tz v Great M||neapo||s Surp|us Store
lacLs u puL up an adverLlsemenL for hls sLore whlch sald 3 8rand new lur CoaLs WorLh Lo $10000/ llsL
Come llrsL erved/ $1 Lach" u aLLempLed Lo buy one buL Lhe sLore refused sued because he was Lhe
flrsL one Lhere
8ule should recover under Lhe second adverLlsemenL because he was Lhe flrsL one aL Lhe sLore
Lherefore he ls accepLlng Lhe requlremenL sLaLed ln Lhe ad
L|s|nore Un|on L|ementary Schoo| D|str|ct v kastorff
lacLs u was Lo prepare a bld Lo be submlLLed Lo Lhe When enLerlng Lhe LoLal amounL for plumblng
he enLers Lhe wrong number 1he day afLer Lhe u flgures ouL Lhe mlsLake he has made he Lells Lhe
school board LhaL he would llke Lo wlLhdraw hls bld 1he school board decllnes hls wlLhdrawal
8ule A general contractor may rescind a bid that was miscalculated due to clerical error if the other party
knows or has reason to know of the error.
Test: a blinding obligation may originate in advertisements addressed to the general public is "whether
the facts show that some performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested.
Acceptance
lnLernaLlonal lllLer Co v Conroe Cln lce LlghL Co
lacLs lnLernaLlonal lllLer Co () offered Lo provlde a waLer sofLener and fllLer Lo Conroe Cln lce LlghL
(u) for $1230 1he offer called for prompL accepLance and would become a blndlng conLracL upon
accepLance by Conroe Cln and subsequenL approval by an execuLlve of lnLernaLlonal lllLer u accepLed
Lhe offer and Lngle 's presldenL approved and slgned Lhe proposal Lhen acknowledged Lhe order
buL dld noL speclflcally lnform u LhaL Lngel had approved of Lhe agreemenL and glven hls endorsemenL
8ule 1he Lerms expressly sLaLed LhaL Lhere would be a conLracL upon an approval by lnLernaLlonal
lllLer's execuLlve offlcer Lngle's endorsemenL saLlsfled LhaL requlremenL AL LhaL momenL a blndlng
conLracL was formed wlLh Conroe Cln accordlng Lo lLs deflnlLely expressed Lerms
WhlLe v Corlles 1lfL
lacLs DeIendants sent speciIications to plaintiII Ior work on an oIIice building and asked the plaintiII to
give them an estimate. PlaintiII leIt the estimate with the deIendant. The deIendant wrote to the plaintiII
stating that the plaintiII can start work. PlaintiII never sent a response to the DeIendants but began work
the next day. PlaintiII commenced a perIormance by purchasing the lumber and beginning to work.
PlaintiII then received a countermand Irom DeIendant.

8ule Where an oIIer is made by one party to another when they are not together, the acceptance oI it by that
other must be maniIested in some appropriate act. PerIormance in this case was not seen to be an appropriate
act. llence ls noL ordlnarlly accepLance

Sh|pment of Goods as Acceptance
CorlnLhlan harmaceuLlcal ysLems lnc Lederle LaboraLorles
lacLs uefendanL was a drug manufacLurer LhaL perlodlcally lssued prlce llsLs Lo cusLomers llke lalnLlff
who purchased vacclnes and dlsLrlbuLed Lhem Lhe physlclans 1he prlce llsL sLaLed LhaL orders were
sub[ecL Lo accepLance by uefendanL and LhaL orders would be prlced accordlng Lo prlce ln effecL aL Lhe
Llme of shlpmenL
8ule 1he LransacLlon was a sale of goods whlch would be governed by ArLlcle 2 of Lhe DCC Dnder Lhe
code accepLance need noL mlrror Lhe offer and shlpplng conformlng goods ls accepLance buL Lhere ls
no accepLance by shlpplng nonconformlng goods when Lhe seller seasonably noLlfles Lhe buyer LhaL Lhe
shlpmenL ls only offered as an accommodaLlon 1he leLLer accompanylng Lhe shlpmenL Lold Lhe buyer
LhaL Lhls parLlal shlpmenL aL a lower prlce was an excepLlon and LhaL Lhe remalnder musL be aL a hlgher
prlce lurLhermore Lhe lnvolce also requlred Lhe buyer Lo assenL Lo Lhose Lerms
1erm|nat|on of the ower of Acceptance
Lapse of an Cffer 8easonable Llme and deLermlned by a reasonable person
ulcklnson v uodds
lacLs uodds senL ulcklnson an offer Lo purchase hls home Lhe offer sald Lhls offer Lo be lefL over unLll
lrlday" meanL Lo reply Lo Lhe offer on 1hursday buL ended up walLlng Pe ls Lhen lnformed LhaL
uodds wanLed Lo sell Lhe properLy Lo Mr Allan ulcklnson Lhen leaves a formal accepLance wlLh uodds'
moLherlnlaw 1he followlng day ulcklnson glves a leLLer of accepLance Lo uodds aL Lhe Lraln sLaLlon
buL uodds lnforms hlm LhaL he's already sold Lhe properLy
8ule ln order for Lhere Lo be an agreemenL Lhere musL be an exlsLence of Lhe same mlnds A mere offer
Lo walL unLll lrlday does noL llmlL someone from selllng Lhelr properLy Lo someone else
1he ueaLh of an Cfferor 8esLaLemenL 8 An offeree's power of accepLance ls LermlnaLed by Lhe
offeror's deaLh or supervenlng lncapaclLy
8e[ecLlon and Lhe mlrror lmage rule A response LhaL does noL exacLly mlrror Lhe Lerms of Lhe orlglnal
offer ls a re[ecLlon and acLs as a counLer offer
1he mallbox rule dlspaLch of Lhe accepLance ls Lhe cruclal polnL aL whlch Lhe k ls made afLer whlch
Lhe offeror's power Lo re[ecL ls ended and Lhe rlsks of Lransmlsslon are on Lhe Cfferor
UCC220S llrm Cffers An offer by a merchanL Lo buy or sell goods ln a slgned wrlLlng whlch by lLs
Lerms glves assurance LhaL lL wlll be held open ls noL revocable for lack of conslderaLlon durlng Lhe
Llme sLaLed or lf no Llme ls sLaLed for a reasonable Llme buL ln no evenL may such perlod of
lrrevocablllLy exceed Lhree monLhs buL any such Lerm of assurance on a form supplled by Lhe offeree
musL be separaLely slgned by Lhe offeror
UCC 2207 ee llowcharL
1he 8att|e of the Iorms and the UCC ln order LhaL an offer and accepLance may resulL ln a blndlng
conLracL Lhe accepLance musL be absoluLe uncondlLlonal and ldenLlcal wlLh Lhe Lerms of Lhe offer and
musL ln every respecL meeL and correspond wlLh Lhe offer and any quallflcaLlon of or deparLure from
Lhose Lerms lnvalldaLes and re[ecLs Lhe offer Where a person offers Lo do a deflnlLe Lhlng and anoLher
accepLs condlLlonally or lnLroduces a new Lerm lnLo Lhe accepLance hls answer ls a mere expresslon of
wllllngness Lo LreaL or lL ls a counLer proposal and ln nelLher case ls Lhere an agreemenL
Standard Iorm and 8att|e of the Iorms ll Lhe seller does noL ob[ecL Lo Lhe plannlng and accepLs Lhe
order Lhe buyer's flne prlnL wlll conLrol lf Lhe seller does ob[ecL dlfferences can be seLLled by
negoLlaLlon
1ranscend|ng the M|rror Image ku|e An expresslon of accepLance may lndeed operaLe as an
accepLance even Lhough lL sLaLes Lerms addlLlonal Lo or dlfferenL from Lhose offered and agreed upon
Lxpress and Imp||ed Jarrant|es
UCC 2102 Scope Certa|n Secur|ty and Cther 1ransact|ons Lxc|uded Irom 1h|s Art|c|e Dnless Lhe
conLexL oLherwlse requlres Lhe ArLlcle applles Lo LransacLlons ln goods lL does noL apply Lo any
LransacLlon whlch alLhough ln Lhe form of an uncondlLlonal conLracL Lo sell or presenL sale ls lnLended Lo
operaLe only as a securlLy LransacLlon nor does Lhls ArLlcle lmpalr or repeal any sLaLuLe regulaLlng sales
Lo consumers farmers or oLher speclfled classes of buyers
UCC 210S(1) Coods means all Lhlngs (lncludlng speclally manufacLured goods) whlch are movable aL
Lhe Llme of ldenLlflcaLlon Lo Lhe conLracL for sale oLher Lhan Lhe money ln whlch Lhe prlce ls Lo be pald
lnvesLmenL securlLles (ArLlcle 8) and Lhlngs ln acLlon Coods" also lncludes Lhe unborn young of
anlmals and growlng crops and oLher ldenLlfled Lhlngs Lo realLy as descrlbed ln Lhe secLlon on goods Lo
be severed from realLy (ecLlon 2107)
UCC2312 Jarranty of 1|t|e (1) ub[ecL Lo subsecLlon (2) Lhere ls ln a conLracL for sale a warranLy by
Lhe seller LhaL (a) Lhe LlLled conveyed shall be good and lLs Lransfer rlghLful (b) Lhe goods shall be
dellvered free from any securlLy lnLeresL or oLher llen or encumbrance of whlch Lhe buyer aL Lhe Llme of
conLracLlng has no knowledge (2) A warranLy under subsecLlon (1) wlll be excluded or modlfled only be
speclflc language or by clrcumsLances whlch glve Lhe buyer reason Lo know LhaL Lhe person selllng does
noL clalm LlLle ln hlmself or LhaL he ls purporLlng Lo sell only such rlghL or LlLle as he or a Lhlrd person
may have (3) Dnless oLherwlse agreed a seller who ls a merchanL regularly deallng ln goods of Lhe klnd
warranLs LhaL Lhe goods shall be dellvered free of Lhe rlghLful clalm of any Lhlrd person by way of
lnfrlngemenL or Lhe llke buL a buyer who furnlshes speclflcaLlons Lo Lhe seller musL hold Lhe seller
harmless agalnsL any such clalm whlch arlses ouL of compllance wlLh Lhe speclflcaLlons
UCC 2313 (Lxpress Jarranty) Lxpress Jarrant|es by Aff|rmat|on rom|se Descr|pt|on Samp|e (1)
Lxpress WarranLles by Lhe seller are creaLed as follows (a) any afflrmaLlon of facL or promlse made by
Lhe seller Lo Lhe buyer whlch relaLes Lo Lhe goods and becomes parL of Lhe basls of Lhe bargaln creaLes
an express warranLy LhaL Lhe goods shall conform Lo Lhe afflrmaLlon or promlse (b) Any descrlpLlon of
Lhe goods whlch ls made parL of Lhe basls of Lhe bargaln creaLes an express warranLy LhaL Lhe goods
shall conform Lo Lhe descrlpLlon (c) Any sample or model whlch ls made parL of Lhe basls of Lhe bargaln
creaLes an express warranLy LhaL Lhe whole of Lhe goods shall conform Lo Lhe sample or model (2) lL ls
noL necessary Lo Lhe creaLlon of an express warranLy LhaL Lhe seller use formal words such as warranL"
or guaranLee" or LhaL he have a speclflc lnLenLlon Lo make a warranLy buL an afflrmaLlon merely of Lhe
value of Lhe goods or a sLaLemenL purporLlng Lo be merely Lhe seller's oplnlon or commendaLlon of Lhe
goods does noL creaLe a warranLy
UCC 2314 (Imp||ed Jarranty of Merchantab|||ty) Dnless excluded or modlfled (ecLlon 2316) a
warranLy LhaL Lhe goods shall be merchanLable ls lmplled ln a conLracL for Lhelr sale lf Lhe seller ls a
merchanL wlLh respecL Lo goods of LhaL klnd Dnder Lhls secLlon Lhe servlng for value of food or drlnk Lo
be consumed elLher on Lhe premlses or elsewhere ls a sale (2) Coods Lo be merchanLable musL be aL
leasL such as (a) pass wlLhouL ob[ecLlon ln Lhe Lrade under Lhe conLracL descrlpLlon and (b) ln Lhe case
of funglble goods are of falr average quallLy wlLhln Lhe descrlpLlon and (c) are flr for Lhe ordlnary
purposes for whlch such goods are used and (d) run wlLhln Lhe varlaLlons permlLLed by Lhe agreemenL
of even klnd quallLy and quaLlLy wlLhln each unlL and among all unlLs lnvolved and (e) are adequaLely
conLalned packaged and labeled as Lhe agreemenL may requlre and (f) conform Lo Lhe promlses or
afflrmaLlons of facL made on Lhe conLalner label lf any (3) Dnless excluded or modlfled (ecLlon 2316)
oLher lmplled warranLles may arlse from course of deallng or usage of Lrade
UCC 231S (Imp||ed Jarranty of I|tness) Where Lhe seller aL Lhe Llme of conLracLlng has reason Lo
know any parLlcular purpose for whlch Lhe goods are requlred and LhaL Lhe buyer ls relylng on Lhe
seller's sklll or [udgmenL Lo selecL or furnlsh sulLable goods Lhere ls unless excluded or modlfled under
Lhe nexL secLlon an lmplled warranLy LhaL Lhe goods shall be flL for such purpose
UCC 2316 (Lxc|us|on and Mod|f|cat|on of Jarrant|es) as ls language
Contemporary rob|ems on Mean|ng of Agreement
roCu lnc v Zeldenburg
lacLs boughL a consumer package of ro Cu's sofLware and lgnored Lhe llcense whlch ls encoded on
Lhe Cu8om as well as prlnLed on Lhe manual and whlch appeared on a user's screen every Llme Lhe
sofLware ran formed a company Lo resell Lhe lnfo ln ro Cu's daLavase aL a prlce less Lhan ro Cu
charges lLs commerclal cusLomers
8ule noce on Lhe ouLslde Lerms on Lhe lnslde and a rlghL Lo reLurn Lhe sofLware for a refund lf Lhe
Lerms are unaccepLable may be a rlghL of dolng buslness Lo buyers and sellers allke
Plll v CaLeway
lacLs Tho Is boughf n Cnfowny 2000. Tho Is fIIod suIf nrguIng fhnf fho roducf`s shorfcomIngs
mnko Cnfowny n rnckofoor. Ono of fho forms In fho box wns nn nrbIfrnfIon cInuso. Howovor, fho Is
kof fho comufor Iongor fhnn fho 30 dnys whIch Is fho IImIf fo rofurn n roducf ns osfnbIIshod by
fho IIconso nnd ngroomonf fhnf shows u whon you fIrsf oon fho comufor. Tho confrncf nIso sfnfod
fhnf fhoro Is nn nrbIfrnfIon cInuso nnd fho nskod fho courf fo onforco If. Judgo rofusod.
8ule Tho IIconso or ngroomonf for n roducf cnn bo uf In fho InsIdo of fho box nnd fho urchnsIng
nrfy cnn rovIow nnd docIdo fo nccof or rojocf fho confrncf nffor fho urchnso

o||c|ng the 8arga|n
Capac|ty
klefer v lred Powe MoLors lnc
lacLs ho I boughf n sfnfIon wngon from fho s n fow monfhs boforo hIs 2l
sf
bIrfhdny. Whon ho
sIgnod fho confrncf ho sIgnod n orfIon fhnf sfnfod fhnf ho wns 2l yonrs of ngo. Ho hnd robIoms
wIfh fho cnr nnd frIod fo rofurn If nnd suod fo rocovor fho rIco. Tho courf nIIowod hIm fo do so
8ule A mlnor ls noL bound by a conLracL lf he was underage when slgned Lhe conLracL
OrfoIoro v. Tonchor`s !ofIromonf Id.
Incfs: Tho doconsod wIfo of fho I wns n 60 yonrs oId YC schooIfonchor who hnd sufforod n norvous
bronkdown dIngnosod ns InvoIufIonnI sychosIs, moInnchoIIn fyo, nnd wns on Ionvo for monfnI
IIInoss. Hor husbnnd hnd quIf hIs job fo fnko cnro of hor. Sho hnd nn nccounf of $?0,925 In fho
ubIIc rofIromonf sysfom In whIch sho hnd nrfIcInfod for ovor 40 yonrs. Two monfhs boforo hor
donfh sho oIocfod fo rocoIvo $450 n monfh wIfh bonofIfs durIng hor IIfofImo, Insfond of 3?5 n monfh.
Sho dId nof foII hor husbnnd nbouf fhIs. Hor husbnnd suod fo sof nsIdo hor oIocfIon on fho ground of
monfnI Incomofonco.
!uIo: If n orson hns n monfnI IIInoss, mnkos n confrncf whIIo hnvIng fhIs monfnI IIInoss, nnd fho
nrfy wIfh whom fho confrncf wns dono knows of fho ofhor nrfIos condIfIon, fhon fho confrncf cnn
bo mnrkod InvnIId.
Cundlck v 8roadbenL
lacLs Tho I onforod Info n confrncf wIfh fho fo soII hIs Inmb cro. A monfh nffor fho ngroomonf
wns nmondod ns fo Incronso fho rIco fo fho . !ndor fho nmondod ngroomonf, moro fhnn 2,000
ncros of rnngo Innd wonf for nbouf $40k, nn oxorf Infor vnIuod If nf $89k. AIso IncIudod wns
CundIck`s Inforosf In n dovoIomonf comnny of whIch fho wns n dIrocfor, nf n rIco of $46,?50, n
wIfnoss Infor vnIuod fhIs nf $l84k nnd ono for fho I nf $?3,?43. HIs wIfo soughf fo roscInd by
nrguIng fhnf fho I hnd boon monfnIIy Incomofonf nnd fhnf ho wns monfnIIy InfIrm nnd fhnf fho
hnd knowIngIy ovorronchod hIm. Thoronffor hIs fnmIIy docfor snw hIm mnny fImos nbouf hIs vnrIous
nIImonfs, buf nofhIng wns snId or dono nbouf fho condIfIon boforo fho suIf wns commoncod.
8ule MenLal lncompeLence aL Lhe Llme of conLracLlng (a facLual quesLlon) creaLes a conLracL LhaL ls
voldable aL Lhe lncompeLenL parLy's opLlon
Unfa|rness
Mcklnnon v 8enedlcL
lacLs Tho I Ionnod fho $5000. Tho monoy wns usod ns nssIsfnnco fo buy n rosorf known ns Ionf`s
cnm. AIso, In mnkIng fho Ionn, fho I romIsod fo hoI fho s gof busInoss. In rofurn, fho s woro
fo nof cuf down In nny froos bofwoon fhoIr cnm nnd hIs roorfy, nnd fo mnko no Imrovomonfs
cIosor fo hIs rosonf roorfy fhnn fho rosonf buIIdIngs. Tho `s ronId fho Ionn In nbouf ? monfhs.
Tho busInoss dId nof rosor so fhoy docIdod fo Invosf $9000 In buIIdozIng nnd InsfnIIIng ufIIIfIos.
Tho I broughf n suIf sookIng fo onjoIn fhom from confInuIng wIfh fhoIr rojocfod Imrovomonfs.
8ule Whoro n confrncf cronfos n wIdo dIsnrIfy bofwoon fho nrfIos, fho courf cnn nuII fho confrncf
nf Ifs dIscrofIon.
TuckwIIIor v. TuckwIIIor
Incfs: IInInfIff !uby TuckwIIIor onforod Info nn ngroomonf fo quIf hor job nnd cnro for fho nunf of
hor husbnnd, Moffn Hudson MorrIson, In oxchnngo for MorrIson wIIIIng hor MorrIson`s Corum fnrm.
MorrIson mndo nn noInfmonf fo hnvo hor wIII chnngod, buf sho wns hosIfnIIzod nnd ovonfunIIy
dIod wIfhouf fho wIII boIng chnngod. Tho wIII sfnfod fhnf fho fnrm shnII bo soId nnd fho rocoods fo
bo usod for n sfudonf Ionn fund nf nvIdson CoIIogo.
!uIo: Thnf IInInfIff rocoIvod somowhnf of n wIndfnII by rocoIvIng fho roorfy wIfhouf hnvIng fo
ncfunIIy cnro for MorrIson Is of no roIovnnco In n dIscussIon of whofhor fho ngroomonf wns
unconscIonnbIo, unfnIr, or InoquIfnbIo. !nfhor, fho frInI courf musf Iook nf fho donI nf fho fImo If wns
consummnfod.
uvess und Pve-xIstIng uty
AInskn Inckors` Ass`n v. omonIco
Incfs: Alaska Packers' Association (D) hired Domenico (P) for the salmon season and agreed to pay $50
dollars plus 2 cents for each salmon caught. After arriving at the location and beginning to work the
workers demanded $100. Due to the remote location and brief duration of the salmon season, the
company representative was compelled to agree to the terms. At the end of the salmon season Alaska
Packers' refused to pay more than the wage under the original contract.
!uIo: An agreement modifying a contract is not supported by consideration if one of the parties to the
agreement does or promises to do something that he is legally obligated to do or refrains or promises to
refrain from doing something he is not legally privileged to do.
SchwnrfzroIch v. numnn-Insch
Incfs: Schwartzreich (Plaintiff) entered into an employment contract with Baum-Basch, nc. (Defendant),
in which Baum-Basch agreed to pay Schwartzreich 90 dollars per week in return for him designing coats
and wraps. The contract was for one year. During the course of this contract, Schartreich went to Baum-
Basch and told him that he had found another job and that they would pay him 115 per week. Baum-
Basch then said that if Schwartsreich would stay, he would pay him 100 per week. Both parties agreed
and signed new contract which would replace the old contract. Plaintiff remained in the defendants
employ until the following December when he was discharged. He brought this action under the contract
of October 17th for his damages after Defendant only paid Plaintiff $90 per week as set forth in the
original contract between the parties.
!uIo: any change in an existing contract, such as a modification of the rate of compensation, or a
supplemental agreement, must have a new consideration to support it. Where an existing contract is
terminated by consent of both parties and a new one executed in its place and stead, we have a different
situation and the mutual promises are again a consideration. Furthermore, the court said that there is no
reason that we (the court) can see why the parties to a contract may not come together and agree to
cancel and rescind an existing contract, making a new one in its place.

ArznnI v. IooIo
Incfs: Tho Is woro buIIdIng n brIdgo. HnIf wny fhrough fho brIdgo fhoy ronIIzod fhnf fhoro wns n
Inw nssod nnd fho Is nskod for moro monoy. Tho s ngrood buf novor nId If.
!uIo: Arzanl had a preexlsLlng duLy Lo do Lhe pavlng work Lhus Lhe promlse ls unenforceable ec73
erformance of a legal duLy owed Lo a promlsor whlch ls nelLher doubLful nor Lhe sub[ecL of honesL
dlspuLe ls noL conslderaLlon buL a slmllar performance ls conslderaLlon lf lL dlffers from whaL was
requlred by Lhe duLy ln a way whlch reflecLs more Lhan a preLense of bargaln"
WaLklns v on v Cralg
lacLs Plaintiff Watkins & Son agreed to excavate a cellar for Defendant Carrig, but Plaintiff
encountered solid rock shortly after the work began. The parties then orally agreed that Plaintiff
would remove the rock for a stipulated price.
8ule The parties rescinded the written contract and entered into an oral one as though it were the
sole agreement. Despite Defendant's contention that the oral contract was not supported by
consideration since the plaintiff did not take on any additional duties, the New Hampshire Supreme
Court held that the original contract was rescinded and a new contract was formed. This is to be
distinguished from the contract being modified to include new terms without consideration.
& 1-20? (Puyment In Iu!!)
PuvtIu! Puyment
4nceu!ment, MIsvepvesentutI4n
SwInfon v. WhIfInsvIIIo Snv. Innk
Incfs: Tho soId fho I n houso. Af fho fImo of fho snIo, fho houso wns Infosfod wIfh formIfos. Tho
I cInIms fhnf fho know fho houso wns Infosfod. Tho I wns nof nbIo fo nofIco whon ho Insocfod
boforo fho urchnso. Ho dId nof Ionrn nbouf fho formIfos unfII Augusf 30, l940. Iocnuso of fho
dosfrucfIon fhnf wns boIng dono nnd fho dnngorous condIfIon fhnf wns boIng cronfod by fho formIfos
fho I wns uf fo gronf oxonso for ronIrs nnd for fho InsfnIInfIon of formIfo confroI In ordor fo
rovonf fho Ioss nnd dosfrucfIon of snId houso
!uIo: A fnIIuro fo Inform fho buyor of n houso of n formIfo InfosfnfIon doos nof gIvo rIso fo n cnuso of
ncfIon for rocovory of dnmngos cnusod by fho undIscIosod condIfIon.
!nIoss fhoro wns n dufy fho soIIor hnd no obIIgnfIon fo dIscIoso fho InfosfnfIon. A confrncf cnnnof bo
mndo voIdnbIo for moro nondIscIosuro. In fhIs cnso fho dofondnnf dId nof hnvo n fIducInry dufy fo fho
InInfIff nnd fhoroforo dId nof hnvo n dufy fo dIscIoso.
Knnnnvos v. AnnIno
ncfs fho boughf n ono-fnmIIy homo. Tho houso wns In n !osIdonco A dIsfrIcf, whoro muIfI-
fnmIIy usors woro rohIbIfod. Sho, howovor, convorfod If Info n muIfI-fnmIIy buIIdIng wIfh 8
nnrfmonfs, wIfhouf obfnInIng n buIIdIng ormIf, nnd In knowIng vIoInfIon of fho cIfy zonIng
ordInnnco. In l965, sho omIoyod n ronI osfnfo brokor fo fry fo soII fho roorfy. Ho Incod
nowsnor nds, ono of fhom snId Incomo gross $9,600 n yonr In Inrgo sIngIo houso, convorfod fo 8
IovoIy, comIofoIy furnIshod nnrfmonfs. 8 bnfhs, IdonI for couIo fo IIvo froo, wIfh oxcoIIonf Incomo.
Iy noInfmonf onIy. Ioofo ronIfy. Tho nnd fho brokor know fhnf fho I`s ronson for buyIng wns
fo ronf fho nnrfmonfs. Ho wns unnwnro of nny zonIng or buIIdIng ormIf vIoInfIon. Tho I wns nof
Inforosfod In In buyIng fho houso unIoss ho couId ronfod ouf fo ofhor ooIo. SInco, fho soIIor dIdn`f
foII hIm fhnf ho wnsn`f nIIowod fo ronf If ouf, ho urchnsod fho houso nnd If wns subsoquonfIy
worfhIoss fo hIm. I broughf suIf nIIogIng fhnf fho shouId hnvo foId hIm nbouf fho Inw.
!uIo If fho monns by whIch n roorfy Is soId Is nf Ionsf somowhnf frnuduIonf fhon fho ruIo of
nonIInbIIIfy for bnro nondIscIosuro cnnnof nIy.
dLesI4n 4ntvucts
xcu!put4vy !uuse - A confrncf rovIsIon fhnf roIIovos ono nrfy of IInbIIIfy If dnmngos nro cnusod
durIng fho oxocufIon of fho confrncf. Tho nrfy fhnf Issuos fho oxcuInfory cInuso Is fyIcnIIy fho ono
sookIng fo bo roIIovod of fho ofonfInI IInbIIIfy. Ior oxnmIo, n vonuo mny rInf nn oxcuInfory
cInuso on fIckofs If soIIs for n concorf IndIcnfIng fhnf If Is nof rosonsIbIo for orsonnI Injury cnusod
by omIoyoos or ofhors durIng fho show.

O`CnIInghnn v. WnIIor & IockwIfh !onIfy Co.
Incfs: IInInfIff IIIn O`CnIInghnn, n fonnnf of n buIIdIng ownod by ofondnnf WnIIor & IockwIfh
!onIfy Co. foII whIIo crossIng fho nvod courfynrd of fho nnrfmonf buIIdIng. Sho suod fo rocovor
dnmngos buf wns donIod rocovory duo fo nn oxcuInfory cInuso In hor Ionso roIIovIng ofondnnf of
IInbIIIfy from orsonnI InjurIos cnusod by nny ncf or nogIocf of ofondnnf.
!uIo: Exculpatory clauses absolving a party of liability are generally enforced unless against public
policy.
Agreeing to BoiIerpIate - While a company should protected in its legal right to limit its
responsibility, the public should also be safeguarded against imposition. f a company wishes to limit
its liability for negligence, it must at least show that it has given adequate notice of the special
contract and that it has received the assent thereto of those with whom it transacts business.
&nc4nscI4nubI!Ity
& 2-302 If fho courf ns n mnffor of Inw fInds fho confrncf or nny cInuso of fho confrncf fo hnvo
boon unconscIonnbIo nf fho fImo If wns mndo fho courf mny rofuso fo onforco fho confrncf, or If mny
onforco fho romnIndor of fho confrcf wIfhouf fho unconscIonnbIo cInuso ns fo nvoId nny
unconscIonnbIo rosuIf.
WIIIInms v. WnIkor-Thomns IurnIfuro Co.
Incfs: AoIInnfs boughf furnIfuro from AoIIoo on crodIf nnd fho K fhnf fhoy sIgnod confnInod n
rovIsIon whIch sfnfod fhnf fho bnInnco wIII romnIn duo on ovory Ifom urchnsod unfII fho bnInnco
duo on nII Ifoms, whonovor urchnsos, wns IIquIdnfod. In cnso of dofnuIf of nymonf, nII fho
furnIfuro on whIch bnInnco Is duo wIII bo fnkon bnck by fho noIIoo. Tho noIInnfs boughf
furnIfuro In l962 nnd dofnuIfod on nymonf. Thoy hnd nIso urchnsod furnIfuro from noIIoo In
l95? on whIch fhoy hnd somo nymonf Ioffovor. Tho noIIoo soughf fo roIovy nII fho Ifoms
urchnsod sInco l95?.
!uIo: !CC 2-302 socIfIcnIIy rovIdos fhnf n courf mny rofuso fo onforco n K whIch If fInds fo bo
unconscIonnbIo nf fho fImo If wns mndo.
Jonos v. Sfnr CrodIf Cor.
Incfs: Plaintiffs, various welfare recipients (Plaintiffs), agreed to purchase a home freezer for $900.
The Plaintiffs paid $619.88 towards the purchase. The Defendant, Star Credit Corp (Defendant),
claimed that charges relating to the extension of time for payment results in a $819.81 still being
due. The maximum retail value of the freezer is $300.
!uIo: IubIIc oIIcy dIcfnfos fhnf unoducnfod consumors shouId bo rofocfod from groody morchnnfs
nnd fho dnngors of unoqunI bnrgnInIng owor. !CC SocfIon:2-302 rovIdos for n mornI sonso of
communIfy In commorcInI frnnsncfIons nnd If n cInuso of n confrncf Is unconscIonnbIo nf fho fImo If
wns mndo, fho courf mny rofuso fo onforco fho confrncf. Tho !CC nIIos fo fho rIco form of n
confrncf.
Thoro Is n ubIIc nocossIfy nnd dosIrnbIIIfy for InsfnIImonfs snIos confrncfs. Howovor, fho rIcIng
schomo on such confrncfs musf nfford somo rofocfIon fo fho soIIor for fho rIsk of soIIIng fo fhoso who
mny dofnuIf on nymonf. Tho rIco forms sof In fho subjocf confrncf nro In oxcoss of nny nssurnncos
nnd fho rosuIf Is nn unconscIonnbIo confrncf.
$pecIu! umuges Issues
umuges u!cu!utI4ns
TLe I4st V4!ume $e!!ev
R.. uvIs LemIcu! 4vp. v. Ius4nIc, Inc.
Incfs: Plaintiff R.E. Davis Chemical Corp. contracted with Defendant Diasonics, nc. for the purchase
of a piece of medical diagnostic equipment. Plaintiff paid a $300,000 deposit but then breached the
contract. This dispute then arose over the proper amount of damages, specifically whether
Defendant was a "lost volume seller (you can produce two instead of one).
!uIo: A "lost volume seller is entitled to lost profits if it can prove that it is able and profitable to
produce at least one more unit of the item sold.
%e Duty to Mitigate
Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co.
Facts: Rockingham County, North Carolina (D) contracted with Luten (P) to construct a bridge. Luten
had completed very little work on the bridge when Rockingham County provided a notice of
cancellation of the contract. The plaintiff proceeded to complete the bridge and brought suit against
the defendant for breach of contract. At trial, the judge instructed a verdict for the full amount of the
claim in Luten's favor and Rockingham County appealed.
Rule: The amount of damages the plaintiff can recover is limited to the amount of damages that he would
have been able to recover as of the time notice was given. Luten is entitled to expenses incurred up until
notice was given, plus expected profit from completion of the contract, plus any other losses incurred up
until the time of breach. A party who receives express notice of breach has a duty to mitigate damages.
TongIsh v. Thomns
Incfs: AoIIoo onnIs TongIsh, n fnrmor, confrncfod wIfh AoIInnf ocnfur Coo AssocInfIon, fo
soII hIs onfIro cro of sunfIowor soods nf $l3.00 or hundrodwoIghf. Affor fho mnrkof rIco roso fo
nbouf $20.00 or hundrodwoIghf, AoIIoo roudInfod hIs ngroomonf wIfh AoIInnf nnd soId hIs
cro fo nnny Thomns for fho now mnrkof rIco.
!uIo: nmngos musf bo comufod undor !.C.C. SocfIon: 2-?l3, whIch sfnfos fhnf dnmngos nro oqunI
fo fho mnrkof rIco nf fho fImo of bronch mInus fho confrncf rIco. Tho !.C.C. confnIns fwo
nnronfIy confIIcfIng rovIsIons fo bo ufIIIzod In comufIng dnmngos. !ndor !.C.C. SocfIon: l-l06,
fho nonbronchIng nrfy Is sImIy comonsnfod for hIs ncfunI Ioss (horo, fho Ioss of hnndIIng chnrgos,
$455). Howovor, undor !.C.C. SocfIon: 2-?l3, fho dnmngos oqunI fho mnrkof rIco nf bronch mInus
fho confrncf rIco. If hns boon snId fhnf fho Inffor rovIsIon romofos mnrkof offIcIoncy by
dIscourngIng fho bronch of confrncfs. In ofhor words, woro If nof for !.C.C. SocfIon: 2-?l3, fho
confrncf rIco wouId ncf ns n rIco fIoor, whIch nIIows fho soIIIng nrfy fo sho nround for n hIghor
rIco knowIng fhnf ho Is gunrnnfood fho confrncf rIco If fho mnrkof rIco dIs boIow fho confrncf
rIco. ThIs dIscourngos fho honorIng of confrncfs nnd mnrkof sfnbIIIfy.
Inrkor v. TwonfIofh Confury-Iox IIIm Cor.
Incfs: IInInfIff Inrkor, boffor known ns ncfross ShIrIoy Mnc!nIno, confrncfod wIfh ofondnnf,
TwonfIofh Confury-Iox IIIm Cor., fo Iny fho fomnIo Iond In fho fIIm IIoomor CIrI. ofondnnf
fhoronffor roudInfod fho ngroomonf by nof roducIng fho Icfuro nnd Insfond offorod IInInfIff fho
Iond fomnIo roIo In nnofhor Icfuro onfIfIod IIg Counfry, IIg Mnn. IInInfIff docIInod, nnd InIfInfod
fhIs ncfIon fo rocovor $?50,000, fho nmounf sho wns fo bo nId undor fho confrncf.
!uIo: A wrongfuIIy dIschnrgod omIoyoo Is onfIfIod fo hIs Iosf snInry, buf ho musf mIfIgnfo dnmngos
by sookIng nIfornnfIvo omIoymonf. Howovor, ho doos nof nood fo nccof dIfforonf or InforIor
omIoymonf.
MIdtevm RevIew
4st t4 4mp!ete 4v ImInutI4n In Vu!ue
acob & Young v. Kent
Facts: Plaintiff acob & Youngs, built a house for Defendant Kent for a price of $77,000, and sued to
recover the balance due of $3,483.46. Defendant specified that all pipe in the house must be
Reading pipe, but inadvertently, Plaintiff installed pipe that was not Reading pipe. When Defendant
discovered this defect, he demanded that the work be redone, which would have required the
demolition and reconstruction of substantial parts of the house, but Plaintiff refused.
Rule: Equity and fairness dictate that one who unintentionally commits a trivial wrong will not be
condemned to a fate so clearly out of proportion with the transgression. To permit Defendant to
recover the cost of replacement of the pipe would be unduly oppressive. nstead, Defendant will be
adequately compensated by recovering the difference in value of a home with the Reading pipe and
the value of the home, as it exists, with a different kind of pipe.
Crovos v. John Wundor Co.
Incfs: ofondnnf John Wundor Co., onforod Info n confrncf wIfh IInInfIff S.J. Crovos & Sons
Comnny, fo romovo snnd nnd grnvoI from IInInfIff`s romIsos nnd Ionvo fho roorfy nf n unIform
grndo, subsfnnfInIIy fho snmo ns fho grndo now oxIsfIng nf fho rondwny. ofondnnf nId IInInfIff
$l05,000 buf wIIIfuIIy fnIIod fo Ionvo fho roorfy nf n unIform grndo.
!uIo: Whoro fho bronch Is wIIIfuI, dnmngos oqunI fho cosf of orformIng fho confrncf, nof fho
dIfforonco bofwoon fho vnIuo of fho roorfy nf fho fImo of confrncfIng nnd fho vnIuo fho roorfy
wouId hnvo hnd If fho dofondnnf fuIIy orformod.
IronchIng nrfy wIII hnvo fo fIx If or ny for If fo gof fIxod.
Ioovyhouso v. CnrInnd ConI & MInIng Co.
Incfs: Garland Coal (D) contracted for the right to strip mine coal on Peevyhouse's (P) property for five
years. The contract provided that Garland would perform restoration work on the property at the end of
the lease period. Peevyhouse sued for $25,000 when Garland refused to perform the restoration. The
judge instructed the jury that it could consider the diminution of value of the land as well as the cost of
restoration in awarding damages.
The jury awarded Peevyhouse $5,000, which was much less than the cost of restoring the property, but
greater than the reduction in value of the land if not restored. Peevyhouse appealed, arguing that it
should be entitled to the cost of obtaining performance of the restoration. Garland Coal argued that
damages should be limited to the difference in market value between the land as it was at the time, and
the land as it would be if the restoration were performed.
!uIo: If bronch orfnIns fo n mnffor onIy IncIdonfnI fo fho mnIn uroso of fho confrncf, nnd
orformnnco wouId bo dIsroorfIonnfoIy cosfIy, fho roor monsuro of dnmngos Is fho dImInufIon In
vnIuo monsuro.
4nsequentIu! umuges
I4veseeubI!Ity
HndIoy v. InxondnIo
Incfs: A shnff In HndIoy`s (I) mIII broko rondorIng fho mIII InoornbIo. HndIoy hIrod InxondnIo ()
fo frnnsorf fho brokon mIII shnff fo nn ongInoor In CroonwIch so fhnf ho couId mnko n duIIcnfo.
HndIoy foId InxondnIo fhnf fho shnff musf bo sonf ImmodInfoIy nnd InxondnIo romIsod fo doIIvor If
fho noxf dny. InxondnIo dId nof know fhnf fho mIII wouId bo InoornbIo unfII fho now shnff nrrIvod.
InxondnIo wns nogIIgonf nnd dId nof frnnsorf fho shnff ns romIsod, cnusIng fho mIII fo romnIn
shuf down for nn nddIfIonnI fIvo dnys. HndIoy hnd nId 2 ounds four shIIIIngs fo shI fho shnff nnd
suod for 300 ounds In dnmngos duo fo Iosf rofIfs nnd wngos. Tho jury nwnrdod HndIoy 25 ounds
boyond fho nmounf nIrondy nId fo fho courf nnd InxondnIo nonIod.
!uIo: An Injurod nrfy mny rocovor fhoso dnmngos ronsonnbIy consIdorod fo nrIso nnfurnIIy from n
bronch of confrncf, or fhoso dnmngos wIfhIn fho ronsonnbIo confomInfIon of fho nrfIos nf fho fImo
of confrncfIng.
Pv4b!em 4n puge 669 If you don`f objocf fo fho dnfo of doIIvory fhon you nro fnkIng nn
nssumfIon of fho rIsk.
& 2-?15: Buyev's IncIdentu! und 4nsequentIu! umuges (l) IncIdonfnI dnmngos rosuIfIng
from fho soIIor`s bronch IncIudo oxonsos ronsonnbIy Incurrod In InsocfIon, rocoIf, frnnsorfnfIon
nnd cnro nnd cusfody of goods rIghffuIIy rojocfod, nny commorcInIIy ronsonnbIo chnrgos, oxonsos or
commIssIons In connocfIon wIfh offocfIng covor nnd nny ofhor ronsonnbIo oxonso IncIdonf fo fho
doIny or ofhor bronch. (2) ConsoquonfInI dnmngos rosuIfIng from gonornI or nrfIcuInr roquIromonfs
nnd noods of whIch fho soIIor nf fho fImo of confrncfIng hnd ronson fo know nnd whIch couId nof
ronsonnbIy bo rovonfod by covor or ofhorwIso; nnd (b) Injury fo orson or roorfy roxImnfoIy
rosuIfIng from nny bronch of wnrrnnfy
Konford Co. v. Counfy of IrIo
Incfs: IInInfIff Konford Co. onforod Info n confrncf wIfh ofondnnf, Counfy of IrIo, fo donnfo Innd
for n now sfndIum. IInInfIff nIso ownod Innd In fho orIhory of fho roosod sfndIum sIfo. Whon
ofondnnf docIdod nof fo buIId fho sfndIum, IInInfIff suod fo rocovor for fho Ioss of nnfIcInfod
nrocInfIon In fho vnIuo of fho Innd fhnf IInInfIff ownod In fho orIhory of fho roosod sfndIum
sIfo.
!uIo: A non-bronchIng nrfy cnn onIy rocovor dnmngo fhnf wns confomInfod nf fho fImo of fho
confrncf. SocuInfIon
evtuInty 41 umuges und IIquIduted umuges
Iorn v. VIIIngo IInzn, Inc.
Incfs: I confrncfod wIfh s fo Ionso n snco In n roosod shoIng confor. Affor Ionso wns oxocufod,
Is gnvo u somo of fhoIr Ionsod snco so fhnf If couId bo Ionsod fo nnofhor fonnnf. In oxchnngo, If
wns ngrood fhnf IIquor snIos wouId bo oxcIudod from fho orconfngo ronf ovorrIdo rovIsIon of fho
Ionso. Whon fho snco wns fInnIIy rondy, Is woro rofusod fho snco for whIch fhoy hnd confrncfod
bocnuso fho Ionso hnd boon mIsIncod, nnd fho snco ronfod fo ofhor fonnnfs. AIfornnfIvo snco wns
offorod buf rofusod by Is ns unsuIfnbIo for fhoIr Innnod busInoss vonfuro. Is InIfInfod suIf In
Wnyno CIrcuIf Courf, nIIogIng n cInIm for nnfIcInfod Iosf rofIfs.
!uIo: !osf rofIfs from n now busInoss mny bo ormIffod ns nn oIomonf of dnmngos rovIdod fhoy
cnn bo rovod wIfh corfnInfy.
IIquIduted umuges - Damages can be liquidated in a contract only if (1) the injury is either
"uncertain" or "difficult to quantify"; (2) the amount is reasonable and considers the actual or anticipated
harm caused by the contract breach, the difficulty of proving the loss, and the difficulty of finding another,
adequate remedy; and (3) the damages are structured to function as damages, not as a penalty. f these
criteria are not met, a liquidated damages clause will be void.
nvo Cusfnfson & Co. v. Sfnfo
Incfs: I surfncod n now sfnfos hIghwny fhnf nrnIIoIod nn oIdor rond fhn romnInod oon durIng nnd
nffor fho consfrucfIon. Ifom fho $530,?24.l4 duo for fho work, fho sfnfo wIfhhoId $l4,0?0 fhnf If
cInImod ns IIquIdnfod dnmngos for n doIny of 6? dnys. Tho confrncf rovIdod n grndunfod scnIo of
IIquIdnfod dnmngos or dny.
!uIo: !IquIdnfod dnmngos cnnnof bo dIsroorfIonnfo
& 2-?1B IIquIdutI4n 4v IImItutI4n 41 umuges; ep4sIts (l) nmngos for bronch by
oIfhor nrfy mny bo IIquIdnfod In fho ngroomonf buf onIy nf nn nmounf whIch Is ronsonnbIo In fho
IIghf of fho nnfIcInfod or ncfunI hnrm cnusod by fho bronch, fho dIffIcuIfIos of roof of Ioss, nnd fho
InconvonIonco or non-fonsIbIIIfy of ofhorwIso obfnInIng nn ndoqunfo romody. A form fIxIng
unronsonnbIy Inrgo IIquIdnfod dnmngos Is voId ns n onnIfy.
vIdence und IntevpvetutI4n
TLe Puv4! vIdence und P4st-4ntvuct M4dI1IcutI4n
CInnnI v. !ussoII & Co.
Incfs: I ownod n sforo In n buIIdIng whoro ho soId fobncco, cnndy, fruIf, nnd soff drInks. boughf
fho buIIdIng nnd sfnrfod Ionso nogofInfIons wIfh I. Thoy ronchod n wrIffon ngroomonf whoro I wns
nIIowod fo soII onIy fruIf, cnndy, nnd soff drInks nnd wns rohIbIfod from soIIIng fobncco. I sIgnod
fho wrIffon ngroomonf. !nfor ronfod fho noIghborIng sforo fo n drug comnny fhnf nIso soId soff
drInks. I cInIms fhnf In consIdornfIon for hIm nof soIIIng fobncco In hIs sforo, hnd mndo nn ornI
ngroomonf fhnf I wouId hnvo fho soIo rIghf fo soII soff drInks In fho buIIdIng. Ivon fhough fhIs
ngroomonf wns nof IncIudod In fho wrIffon K, I cInIms fhnf If wns n sonrnfo ornI ngroomonf.
!uIo: To doformIno whofhor fho K Is comIofo on Ifs fnco, fho courf wIII do fho 4 cornors ruIo. Tho
Inw mnkos fho wrIfIng fho bnsIs for fho ngroomonf.
Mnsforson v. SIno
Incfs: nIIns nnd !oboccn Mnsforson (I) ownod n rnnch ns fonnnfs In common whIch fhoy convoyod
by grnnf dood fo nIIns` sIsfor nnd hor husbnnd (I.o. SIno, ). Mnsforson rosorvod nn ofIon fo
rourchnso fho rnnch wIfhIn fon yonrs In oxchnngo for fho consIdornfIon nId by SIno, Ius fho
dorocInfIon vnIuo of nny Imrovomonfs. nIIns Infor wonf bnnkruf. !oboccn nnd nIIns` frusfoo In
bnnkrufcy (Il) broughf n docInrnfory judgmonf ncfIon fo osfnbIIsh fhoIr rIghf fo oxorcIso fho ofIon.
!uIo: If IookIng nf fho K Is nof onough fo doformIno who wIns In fho cnso fhon nrfIos wo wIII nIIow
nrfIos fo foII us whnf wns Infondod.
CnIIfornIn !uIo Hof Tub !uIo
Y !uIo
IoIIIngor v. ConfrnI IonnsyIvnnIn Qunrry SfrIIng nnd ConsfrucfIon Co.
Incfs: IInInfIffs MnhIon nnd VInoffn IoIIIngor onforod Info n wrIffon confrncf wIfh fho ofondnnf
ConfrnI IonnsyIvnnIn Qunrry SfrIIng nnd ConsfrucfIon Comnny, fhnf ormIffod ofondnnf fo
doosIf consfrucfIon wnsfo on IInInfIffs` roorfy. IInInfIffs cInIm fhnf fho nrfIos ngrood fhnf
ofondnnf wouId covor fho wnsfo wIfh fosoII, buf such n rovIsIon wns, by mIsfnko, nof IncIudod In
fho wrIffon ngroomonf.
!uIo: A courf, ncfIng In oquIfy, mny roform n confrncf fo corrocf n mufunI mIsfnko In fho InfogrnfIon
of fho ngroomonf. If bofh nrfIos ncfod In n wny fhnf foIIowod whnf shouId hnvo boon In fho cInuso
fhon fho courfs cnn doformIno fhnf fhoro wns n mIsfnko. Ivon If If snys fInnI, fho courfs wIII Iook nf
fho fncfs.
& 2-202 IInu! WvItten xpvessI4n: Puv4! 4v xtvInsIc vIdence Torms wIfh rosocf fo
whIch fho confIrmnfory momornndn of fho nrfIos ngroo or whIch nro ofhorwIso sof forfh In n wrIfIng
Infondod by fho nrfIos ns n fInnI oxrossIon of fhoIr ngroomonf wIfh rosocf fo such forms ns nro
IncIudod fhoroIn mny bo confrndIcfod by ovIdonco of nny rIor ngroomonf or of n confomornnoous
ornI ngroomonf buf mny bo oxInInod or suIomonfod: (n) by courso of donIIng or usngo of frndo
(SocfIon l-205) or by courso of orformnnco (SocfIon 2-208); nnd (b) by ovIdonco or consIsfonf
nddIfIonnI forms unIoss fho courf fInd fho wrIfIng fo hnvo boon Infondod nIso ns n comIofo nnd
oxcIusIvo sfnfomonf of fho forms of fho ngroomonf
& 2-209 (2) M4dI1IcutI4n, RescIssI4n und WuIvev (2) A sIgnod ngroomonf whIch oxcIudos
modIfIcnfIon or roscIssIon oxcof by n sIgnod wrIfIng cnnnof bo ofhorwIso modIfIod or roscIndod, buf
oxcof ns bofwoon morchnnfs such n roquIromonf on n form suIIod by fho morchnnf musf bo
sonrnfoIy sIgnod by fho ofhor nrfy.
IrIgnIImonf ImorfIng Co. v. I..S InfornnfIonnI SnIos Cor
Incfs: IS InfornnfIonnI SnIos Cor. () onforod Info fwo confrncfs fo soII chIckon fo IrIgnIImonf
(I). Whon fho InIfInI shImonf nrrIvod In SwIfzorInnd, IrIgnIImonf found fhnf fho honvIor bIrds woro
sfowIng chIckons or fowI, nof young chIckons suIfnbIo for broIIIng nnd fryIng. IS InfornnfIonnI
boIIovod fhnf nny fyo of chIckon wouId moof fho confrncf socIfIcnfIons rognrdIng woIghf nnd
qunnfIfy, IncIudIng sfowIng chIckons. IrIgnIImonf on fho ofhor hnnd boIIovod fhnf chIckon monnf
n young chIckon. IrIgnIImonf broughf fhIs InwsuIf for bronch of wnrrnnfy on fho grounds fhnf IS
InfornnfIonnI doIIvorod goods fhnf dId nof moof fho socIfIcnfIons of fho confrncf.
!uIo: Thoro wns no moofIng of fho mInds. Tho burdon wns on fho I fo rovo fhnf fho monnIng of fho
word chIckon wns ns fhoy fhoughf If wns.
!nffIos v. WIchoIhnus
Incfs: Raffles (P) contracted to sell 125 bales of Surat cotton to Wichelhaus (D). The goods were to be
shipped from Bombay to Liverpool, England on the ship "Peerless. Neither party was aware that there
were two ships names "Peerless carrying cotton from Bombay to Liverpool, one arriving in October and
the other in December.
Wichelhaus thought he had purchased the cotton arriving on the October ship, but Raffles sent his cotton
on December ship. Wichelhaus refused to accept delivery of the cotton arriving on the December ship
and Raffles brought this lawsuit for breach of contract.
!uIo: Thoro wns no moofIng of fho mInds nnd fhoroforo no K. Tho roIo of judgos Is fo Iook nf fho
wrIffon Inw nnd doformIno whnf fho K monns.
IncIfIc Cns & IIocfrIc Co. v. C.W. Thomns rnyngo & !IggIng Co.
Incfs:
!uIo:
4ndItI4ns
MnffoI v. Hoor
Incfs: Tho I wnnfod fo buy n shoIng confor from fho soIIor. Tho nrfIos cnmo fo nn ngroomonf
nnd fho I gnvo fho whIch wns ovIdoncod by n $l000 doosIf. Tho romnInIng $5?,500 woro duo
nffor n l20 dnys orIod, whoro fho I couId oxnmIno fho fIfIo nnd consummnfo fho urchnso. Af fho
oxIrnfIon of fhnf orIod, fho bnInnco of fho rIco wns duo nnd nynbIo uon fondor of n good nnd
suffIcIonf dood of fho roorfy soId. Tho concIudIng nrngrnh of fho doosIf rocoIf rovIdod:
Subjocf fo CoIdwoII Innkor & Comnny obfnInIng Ionsos snfIsfncfory fo fho urchnsor.
WhIIo I wns In fho rocoss of socurIng fho Ionsos nnd boforo fho l20 dnys hnd oInsod, `s
nffornoy nofIfIod I fhnf wouId nof soII hor Innd undor fho forms confnInod In fho doosIf rocoIf.
Thoronffor, wns Informod fhnf snfIsfncfory Ionsos hnd boon obfnInod nnd fhnf I hnd offorod fo ny
fho bnInnco of fho urchnso rIco. fnIIod fo fondor fho dood ns rovIdod In fho doosIf rocoIf.
!uIo: If fho nrfIos ngroo fo n rovIsIon whon mnkIng n confrncf fhon fho rovIsIon Is onforconbIo If If
nssos fho ronsonnbIo orson fosf. Inrfy fhnf doos nof hnvo fho owor fo mnko fho rovIsIon hns
nIrondy ngrood fo orform uon nccofnnco.
!uffIngor v. !oson
Incfs: Tho Is confrncfod fo urchnso for 85,000 romIsos In fho cIfy of Sfnmford ownod by fho s
nnd nId n doosIf of 8,500. Tho K wns subjocf fo nnd condIfIonnI uon fho buyors obfnInIng fIrsf
morfgngo fInnncIng on snId romIsos from n bnnk or ofhor IondIng InsfIfufIon In nn nmounf of
$45,000 for n form of nof Ioss fhnn 20 yonrs nnd nf nn Inforosf rnfo whIch doos nof oxcood 8
orconf or nnnum. Tho Is ngrood fo uso duo dIIIgonco In nffomfIng fo obfnIn such fInnncIng. Tho
nrfIos furfhor ngrood fhnf If fho Is woro unsuccossfuI In obfnInIng fInnncIng ns rovIdod In fho K,
nnd nofIfIod fho soIIor wIfhIn n socIfIc fImo, nII sums nId on fho K wouId bo rofundod nnd fho K
formInnfod wIfhouf furfhor obIIgnfIon (condIfIon rocodonf).

In nIyIng for n morfgngo whIch wouId snfIsfy fho confIngoncy cInuso In fho confrncf, fho Is roIIod
on fhoIr nffornoy who nIIod nf n ow Hnvon IondIng InsfIfufIon for $45,000 Ionn nf 8 orconf or
nnnum. Tho I`s nffornoy know fhnf fhIs IondIng InsfIfufIon wns fho onIy ono whIch nf fhnf fImo
wouId Iond ns much ns $45,000 on morfgngo for n sIngIo-fnmIIy dwoIIIng. SInco fhIs commIfmonf
fnIIod fo moof fho AK roquIromonf, fImoIy nofIco wns gIvon fo fho s nnd domnnd wns mndo for fho
rofurn of fho down nymonf. Tho `s counsoI fhorofnffor offorod fo mnko u fho dIfforonco bofwoon
fho Inforosf rnfo offorod by fho bnnk nnd fho 8 orconf rnfo rovIdod In fho K for fho onfIro 25
yonrs by n fundIng nrrnngomonf, fho oxncf forms of whIch woro nof dofInod. Tho Is dId nof nccof
fhIs offor nnd on fho `s rofusnI fo rofun fho doosIf nn ncfIon wns broughf
!uIo: A condIfIon rocodonf Is n fncf or ovonf whIch fho nrfIos Infond musf oxIsf or fnko Inco boforo
fhoro Is n rIghf fo orformnnco. Tho Inngungo of fho K Is unnmbIguous nnd cIonrIy IndIcnfos fhnf fho
nrfIos Infondod fhnf fho urchnso of fho `s romIsos bo condIfIonod on fho obfnInIng by fho Is of n
morfgngo ns socIfIod In fho K. Irom fho subordInnfo fncfs found fho courf couId ronsonnbIy concIudo
fhnf sInco fho Is woro unnbIo fo obfnIn n $45,000 morfgngo nf no moro fhnn 8 or nnnum
Inforosf from n bnnk or ofhor IondIng InsfIfufIon fho condIfIon rocodonf fo orformnnco of fho K
wns nof mof nnd fho Is woro onfIfIod fo fho rofund of fho fhoIr doosIf. Any nddIfIonnI offor bf fho
s fo fund fho dIfforonco In Inforosf nymonfs couId bo rojocf by fho Is.
Ioncock ConsfrucfIon Co. v. Modorn AIr CondIfIonIng, Inc
Incfs: Modorn AIr CondIfIonIng (I) nnd OvorIy MnnufncfurIng (Il) subconfrncfod wIfh Ioncock
ConsfrucfIon () fo orform honfIng/nIr condIfIonIng nnd swImmIng ooI work for n condomInIum
consfrucfIon rojocf. Tho wrIffon subconfrncfs rovIdod fhnf Ioncock ConsfrucfIon wouId mnko fInnI
nymonf fo fho subconfrncfors wIfhIn 30 dnys nffor comIofIon of fho work IncIudod In fhIs
subconfrncf, wrIffon nccofnnco by fho ArchIfocf nnd fuII nymonf fhoroforo by fho Ownor.
Whon fho subconfrncfors comIofod fho work, fho dofondnnf dId nof ny fhom bocnuso fho ownor
hnd nof yof nId In fuII. Tho InInfIffs broughf sonrnfo suIfs ngnInsf Ioncock ConsfrucfIon for
nymonf. Af frInI fho courf rojocfod fho dofondnnf`s confonfIon fhnf nymonf by fho ownor wns n
condIfIon rocodonf fo nyIng fho subconfrncfors nnd grnnfod summnry judgmonf In fnvor of
InInfIffs. Tho courf of nonIs nffIrmod nnd dofondnnf nonIod fo fho IIorIdn Suromo Courf.
!uIo: IrovIsIons cnIIIng for nymonfs nffor wrIffon nccofnnco by fho nrchIfocf nnd fuII nymonf by
fho ownor do nof sof condIfIons rocodonf; fhoy consfIfufo nbsoIufo romIsos fo ny, fIxIng nymonf
by fho ownor ns n ronsonnbIo fImo for mnkIng nymonf fo fho subconfrncfor. Tho gonornI ruIo Is fhnf
InforrofnfIon of n documonf Is n quosfIon of Inw rnfhor fhnn of fncf. Tho InfonfIons of fho nrfIos
mny bo doformInod from fho wrIffon confrncf, ns n mnffor of Inw, whon fho nnfuro of fho frnnsncfIon
Ionds IfsoIf fo judIcInI InforrofnfIon.
CIbson v. Crnnngo
Incfs: Tho IInInfIff suod fo rocovor fho confrncf rIco for n Icfuro fhnf ho ngrood fo hnvo mndo for
fho ofondnnf. Tho confrncf sfnfod fhnf fho ofondnnf hnd fho rIghf fo rojocf fho Icfuro If If wns
unsnfIsfncfory nnd ho dId rojocf If.
!uIo: Tho nrfIos fo nn ngroomonf nro sfrIcfIy bound by Ifs forms. Horo, fho ofondnnf hnd fho rIghf
fo rojocf or nccof fho fInIshod Icfuro. If, for whnfovor ronson, fho Icfuro wns unsnfIsfncfory, fho
ofondnnf hnd fho rIghf fo rojocf If nnd nof ny for If, whIch ho dId. Thoroforo, fho IInInfIff hns no
rocourso ngnInsf fho ofondnnf undor fhIs confrncf.
M4ve 4ndItI4ns
KIngsfon v. Irosfon
Incfs: KIngsfon (IInInfIff) broughf nn ncfIon for bronch of confrncf ngnInsf Irosfon (ofondnnf) for
fnIIIng fo comIy wIfh covonnnfs fo fho confrncf.
!uIo: Thoro nro fhroo fyos of covonnnfs: (l) fhoso fhnf nro mufunI nnd Indoondonf whoro oIfhor
nrfy mny rocovor dnmngos from fho ofhor for fho Injury ho rocoIvod ns n rosuIf of fho nrfy`s bronch
nnd If Is no oxcuso for fho ofondnnf fo nIIogod bronch of n covonnnf on bohnIf of IInInfIff; (2)
covonnnfs whIch nro condIfIons nnd doondonf In whIch orformnnco of ono doonds on fho
orformnnco of nnofhor, fIII fho rIor condIfIon Is orformod fho ofhor nrfy Is nof IInbIo fo nn ncfIon
on hIs covonnnf; nnd (3) fhoso fhnf nro mufunI condIfIons fo bo orformod nf fho snmo fImo nnd If
ono nrfy rondIIy orforms nn fho ofhor rofusod fo orform nnd fho nrfy who wns rondy fo orform
mny mnInfnIn nn ncfIon for fho dofnuIf of fho ofhor.
Tho romIsos woro nof Indoondonf nnd fho gIvIng of n socurIfy by fho IInInfIff wns n condIfIon fo
fho ofondnnf`s dufy fo convoy fho busInoss. IrosonfIng good consIdornfIon Is condIfIon rocodonf fo
ofondnnf`s obIIgnfIon fo convoy fho busInoss. If wouId bo n gronf InjusfIco fo comoI fho ofondnnf
fo furn ovor hIs busInoss fo fho IInInfIff wIfhouf fho socurIfy for whIch ho bnrgnInod for nnd fo hnvo
fho onIy romody nn ncfIon for bronch.
Iorguson v. IhoonIx
Incfs: Iorrosf . Iorguson (IInInfIff) suod IhoonIx Assurnnco Comnny of ow York (ofondnnf) on
n Sforokooors IurgInry nnd !obbory IoIIcy for Ioss of monoy by snfo burgInry. ofondnnf nonIs
from n dIsfrIcf courf judgmonf for fho IInInfIff.
!uIo: You cnn`f hIdo n cInuso fhnf IImIfs IInbIIIfy. You hnvo fo mnko If oxIIcIf.
Pev14vmunce und BveucL
$u!e 41 G44ds: Tendev, cceptunce, ReJectI4n, Rev4cutI4n
& 2-601 Buyev's RIgLt 4n Impv4pev e!Ivevy (TLe pev1ect tendev vu!e) Subjocf fo fho
rovIsIons of fhIs ArfIcIo on bronch In InsfnIImonf confrncfs (SocfIon 2-6l2) nn dunIoss ofhorwIso
ngrood undor fho socfIons on confrncfunI IImIfnfIons of romody (SocfIons 2-?l8 nnd 2-?l9), I fhfo
goods or fho fondor of doIIvory fnII In nny rosocf fo conform fo fho confrncf, fho buyor mny: (n) rojocf
fho whoIo; or (b) nccof fho whoIo; or (c) nccof nny commorcInI unIf
& 2-602 Munnev und 11ect 41 RIgLt1u! ReJectI4n (l) !ojocfIon of goods musf bo wIfhIn n
ronsonnbIo fImo nffor fhoIr doIIvory or fondor. If Is InoffocfIvo unIoss fho buyor sonsonnbIy nofIfIos
fho soIIor. (2) Subjocf fo fho rovIsIons of fho fwo foIIowIng socfIon on rojocfod goods (n) nffor
rojocfIon nny oxorcIso of ownorshI by fho buyor wIfh rosocf fo nny commorcInI unIf Is wrongfuI ns
ngnInsf fho soIIor; nnd (b) If fho buyor hns boforo rojocfIon fnkon hysIcnI ossossIon of goods In
whIch ho doos nof hnvo socurIfy Inforosf undor fho rovIsIons of fhIs nrfIcIo ho Is undor n dufy nffor
rojocfIon fo hoId fhom wIfh ronsonnbIo cnro nf fho soIIor`s dIsosIfIon for n fImo suffIcIonf fo ormIf
fho soIIor fo romovo fhom; buf (c) fho buyor hns no furfhor obIIgnfIons wIfh rognrd fo goods rIghffuIIy
rojocfod. (3) fho soIIor`s rIghfs wIfh rosocf fo goods wrongfuIIy rojocfod nro govornod by fho
rovIsIons of fhIs ArfIcIo on SoIIor`s romodIos In gonornI
& 2-605 WuIvev 41 Buyev's ObJectI4ns by IuI!uve t4 PuvtIcu!uvIze (l) Tho buyor`s fnIIuro
fo sfnfo In connocfIon wIfh rojocfIon n nrfIcuInr dofocf whIch Is nscorfnInnbIo by ronsonnbIo
InsocfIon rocIudos hIm from roIyIng on fho unsfnfod dofocf fo jusfIfy rojocfIon or fo osfnbIIsh
bronch. (n) whoro fho soIIor couId hnvo curod If If sfnfod sonsonnbIy; or (b) bofwoon morchnnfs whon
fho soIIor hns nffor rojocfIon mndo n roquosf In wrIfIng for n fuII nnd fInnI wrIffon sfnfomonf of nII
dofocfs on whIch fho buyor roosos fo roIy. (2)Inymonf ngnInsf documonfs mndo wIfhouf
rosorvnfIon of rIghfs rocIudos rocovory of fho nymonf for dofocfs nnronf on fho fnco of fho
documonfs
& 2-606 - WLut 4nstItutes cceptunce 41 G44ds (l) Accofnnco of goods occurs whon fho
buyor (n) nffor ronsonnbIo oorfunIfy fo Insocf fho goods sIgnIfIos fo fho soIIor fhnf fho goods nro
conformIng or fhnf ho wIII fnko or rofnIn fhom In sIfo of fhoIr noncomformIfy; or (b) fnIIs fo mnko nn
offocfIvo rojocfIon (subsocfIon (l) of SocfIon hns hnd n ronsonnbIo oorfunIfy fo Insocf fhom; or (c)
doos nny ncf InconsIsfonf wIfh fho soIIor`s ownorshI; buf If such ncf Is wrongfuI ns ngnInsf fho soIIor
If Is nn nccofnnco onIy If rnfIfIod by hIm.
& 2-60? 11ect 41 cceptunce; N4tIce 41 BveucL; Buvden 41 stub!IsLIng BveucL 1tev
ccpetunce; N4tIce 41 !uIm 4v IItIgutI4n t4 Pevs4n nswevub!e Ovev
& 2-60B Rev4cutI4n t4 cceptunce In WL4!e 4v In Puvt: Tho buyor mny rovoko hIs
nccofnnco of n Iof or commorcInI unIf whoso non-conformIfy subsfnnfInIIy ImnIrs Ifs vnIuo fo hIm If
ho hns nccofod If (n) on fho ronsonnbIo nssumfIon fhnf Ifs non-conformIfy wouId bo curo nnd If hns
nof boon sonsonnbIy curod; or (b) wIfhouf dIscovory of such non-conformIfy If hIs nccofnnco wns
ronsonnbIo Inducod oIfhor by fho dIffIcuIfy of dIscovory boforo nccofnnco or by fho soIIor`s
nssurnncos
Pev1ect Tendev Ru!e A ruIo dovoIood fhnf n buyor wns onfIfIod fo rojocf goods unIoss fho soIIor
mndo n orfocf fondor. Tho roquIromonf of orfocfIon covorod nof onIy fho qunnfIfy of fho goods buf
nIso fho dofnIIs of shImonf. !CC 2-6l2 nIIows n buyor undor n K for doIIvory of goods fo curo n
dofocfIvo fondor. AIIows fho buyor who hns nIrondy nccofod fho goods fo rovoko fhnf nccofnnco
(nnd rofurn fho goods fo fho soIIor) onIy If fho nonconformIfy subsfnnfInIIy ImnIrs fhoIr vnIuo fo
hIm. ThIrd, 2-6l2 sImIInrIy nIIows n buyor undor n K for doIIvory of goods In InsfnIImonfs fo rojocf
nn InsfnIImonf onIy If n non-conformIfy ns fo fho goods subsfnnfInIIy ImnIrs fho vnIuo fo fhnf
InsfnIImonf nnd fo cInIm n bronch of fho whoIo confrncf onIy for n bronch fhnf subsfnnfInIIy ImnIrs
fho vnIuo of fho whoIo confrncf.
WnIkor nnd Co. v. HnrrIson
Incfs: I InsfnIIod n bIIIbonrd for s busInoss. A wrIffon confrncf wns sIgnod bofwoon bofh nrfIos. I
nf hIs oxonso, ngrood fo nnd sorvIco fho sIgn ns fho I snw fIf. Somoono fhrow n fomnfo nf fho
bIIIbonrd nnd fho I dId nof cIonn If u rIghf nwny. sfood mnkIng nymonfs nnd sonf n Ioffor fo
I foIIIng hIm of fhIs.
!uIo: In ordor for fho courf fo ruIo ngnInsf n nrfy fhnf bronchod n condIfIon In fho K, fho condIfIon
bronchod musf hnvo boon mnforInI
TIme 14v Pev14vmunce Tho orformnnco of fho work musf rocodo nymonf, In fho nbsonco of n
showIng of n confrnry InfonfIon. If Is somofImos suosod, fhnf fhIs rIncIIo grow ouf of
omIoymonf confrncfs, nnd rofIocfs n convIcfIon fhnf omIoyors ns n cInss nro moro IIkoIy fo bo
rosonsIbIo fhnf nro workmon nId In ndvnnco. Whofhor or nof fho oxInnnfIon Is corrocf, mosf
nrfIos fodny confrncf wIfh roforonco fo fho rIncIIo, nnd unIoss fhoy hnvo ovIdoncod n confrnry
InfonfIon If Is nf Ionsf ns fnIr ns fho oosIfo ruIo wouId bo. !osfnfomonf socfIon 234, commonf o
Sfownrf v. owborry
Incfs: I offorod fo do oxcnvnfIon work for fho . nccofod fho offor. ofhIng wns snId nbouf fho
mnnnor of nymonf. I commoncod work nnd confInuod for n fow monfhs buf dIsconfInuod work
nffor ho sonf n bIII fo fho nnd fho rofusod fo ny If. Tho , fhon, wrofo fo fho I IoffIng hIm know
fhnf fho confrncf wns nuII duo fo fho Is InncfIvIfy rognrdIng
!uIo: Whoro n K Is mndo fo orform work nnd no ngroomonf Is mndo ns fo nymonf, fho work musf
bo subsfnnfInIIy orformod boforo nymonf cnn bo domnndod
Jncob & Youngs v. Konf
Incfs: IInInfIff Jncob & Youngs, buIIf n houso for ofondnnf Konf for n rIco of $??,000, nnd suod fo
rocovor fho bnInnco duo of $3,483.46. ofondnnf socIfIod fhnf nII Io In fho houso musf bo !ondIng
Io, buf InndvorfonfIy, IInInfIff InsfnIIod Io fhnf wns nof !ondIng Io. Whon ofondnnf
dIscovorod fhIs dofocf, ho domnndod fhnf fho work bo rodono, whIch wouId hnvo roquIrod fho
domoIIfIon nnd roconsfrucfIon of subsfnnfInI nrfs of fho houso, buf IInInfIff rofusod.
!uIo: If fho orformnnco wns subsfnnfInIIy comIofo fhon you cnn suo for fho rofonfIons. If fho work
wns nof subsfnnfIvoIy comIofod fhon fhoro Is no nbIIIfy fo suo undor fho confrncf.
IInnfo v. Jncobs
Incfs: I confrncfod wIfh fo furnIsh fho mnforInIs nnd consfrucf n houso In nccordnnco wIfh Inco
nnd socIfIcnfIons, for fho sum of $26,?65. urIng fho courso of fho consfrucfIon, I wns nId
$20,000. Isufos nroso bofwoon fho nrfIos, fho rofusod fo confInuo nymonfs nnd I dId nof
comIofo fho houso.
!uIo: Thoro cnn bo rocovory on fho K bocnuso fhoro wns subsfnnfInI orformnnco. Tho I shouId
rocovor fho K rIco Ioss fho dnmngos cnusod by fho
IvIsIb!e und $epuvute 4ntvucts
CIII v. Johnsfown !umbor Co.
Incfs: I ngrood fo drIvo somo four mIIIIon foof of Iogs, nnd fo bogIn drIvIng nf onco, If suffIcIonf
nnfurnI wnfor, or by fho uso of sInsh dnms. Tho frInI courf dIrocfod vordIcf for fho Johnsfown
Iumbor Co. on fho ground fhnf fho K wns onfIro nnd fhnf fho I dofnuIfod whon n fIood cnrrIod n
consIdornbIo roorfIon of fho Iogs nsf fho Johnsfown !umbor Co.`s boom.
!uIo: Tho courf, In nnnIyzIng fho cnso, wIII Iook nf fho uIfImnfo objocfIvo. SInco fho work consIsfod
of sovornI Ifoms If ronsons fhnf fhIs work wns norfIonod nmong sovornI Ifoms nnd nof nn onfIro
sum
ntIcIput4vy BveucL
Hochsfor v. o !n Tour
Incfs: Cuy Is suosod fo work wIfh durIng hIs frI. cnncoIs. I suos boforo fho bronch
!uIo: You hnvo fo suo nffor fho K hns boon bronchod
Knnnvos v. Hnncock Innk & Trusf Co.
Incfs: Knnnvos (IInInfIff) nnd Hnncock Innk & Trusf (ofondnnf) hnd nn ngroomonf, whIch
rovIdod IInInfIff wIfh n rIghf of fIrsf rofusnI on shnros of sfock. IInInfIff suod whon ofondnnf soId
fho shnros fo n fhIrd nrfy wIfhouf fIrsf offorIng IInInfIff nn oorfunIfy fo urchnso fhom. Ovor
objocfIons, fho frInI courf ruIod In fnvor of fho IInInfIff. Tho Suromo JudIcInI Courf of
Mnssnchusoffs romnndod fho cnso fo doformIno whofhor IInInfIff wouId hnvo boon nbIo fo ny for
fho shnros If offorod nn oorfunIfy fo urchnso fhom.
!uIo:YO! hnvo fo rovo fhnf you woro wIIIIng, rondy nnd nbIo fo orform If fhoro hndn`f boon n
bronch. ThIs Is cnIIod rIghf of fIrsf rofusnI (boforo wo soII If fo nnyono oIso wo hnvo fo gIvo you fho
rIghf fo buy If fIrsf). If I wnsn`f nbIo fo orform fhon ho wnsn`f dnmngod.
& 2-609 RIgLt t4 dequute ssuvunce 41 Pev14vmunce (l) A confrncf for snIo Imosos nn
obIIgnfIon on onch nrfy fhnf fho ofhor`s oxocfnfIon of rocoIvIng duo orformnnco wIII nof bo
ImnIrod. Whon ronsonnbIo grounds for InsocurIfy nrIso wIfh rosocf fo fho orformnnco of oIfhor
nrfy fho ofhor mny In wrIfIng domnnd ndoqunfo nssurnnco of duo orformnnco nnd unfII ho rocoIvos
such nssurnnco mny If commorcInIIy ronsonnbIo susond nny orformnnco for whIch ho hns nof
nIrondy rocoIvod fho ngrood rofurn.
IhoIs v. Horro
Incfs: IhoIs nnd Horro onforod Info n wrIffon ngroomonf whoro Horro ngrood fo soII nnd IhoIs
ngrood fo buy frncfIonnI Inforosfs In nnd fo corfnIn ronI roorfy nnd corornfo sfock for fho sum of
$3?,500. IhoIs wouId ny fho urchnso rIco ns foIIows:
O IIvo fhousnnd doIInrs In cnsh on or boforo Jnnunry l, l956.
O A romIssory nofo In fho nmounf of 32500 cnIIIng for rIncInI nymonfs In fho nmounf of
5000 Ius Inforosf nf fho rnfo of four or conf or nnnum on fho fIrsf of onch succoodIng
Jnnunry nnd fho onfIro bnInnco fo bocomo duo nnd nynbIo Jnnunry l, l963. Howovor,
IhoIs nnd Snndsbury (noIInnfs, buyors), mny oxfond fho mnfurIfy dnfo unfII Jnnunry l,
l963, by gIvIng nofIco of InfonfIon fo so oxfond In wrIfIng fo Horro (noIIoo, soIIor) on or
boforo JuIy l, l960.
IhoIs nId fho fIrsf ns rovIdod In fho ngroomonf.
In Sofombor, l956, Horro (soIIor) frnnsforrod unfo fho noIInnfs fhoIr frncfIonnI Inforosfs In fho
ronI osfnfo nnd corornfo sfock nnmod In fho K.
Soon fhoronffor, nogofInfIons woro conducfod by fho nrfIos, whIch hnd ns fhoIr objocfIvo fho snIo fo
fho noIInnfs of nII of fho Inforosfs of fho noIIoos In nII busInoss onforrIsos whoro fhoro woro
mufunI Inforosfs or n urchnso by fho noIIoos of fho noIInnfs` Inforosf fhoroIn.
On Ocfobor ll, l956, Horro confonds fhnf fho IhoIs mndo nn ornI roosnI fhnf wns subsoquonfIy
nccofod uncondIfIonnIIy by Horro In wrIfIng, fhoroby mnkIng n bIndIng K
Horro nIIogos fhnf fhIs K mnforInIIy chnngod fhoIr obIIgnfIons fhoroundor.
IhoIs confonds fhnf Horro dId nof nccof fho roosnI ns mndo by fhom, nnd cInIm fho nccofnnco
confnInod n numbor of forms oIfhor In nddIfIon fo or nf vnrInnco wIfh fho ornI offor mndo by fhom;
consoquonfIy fho urorfod nccofnnco wns no moro fhnn n coufnor roosnI, whIch wns nof
nccofnbIo fo fhom.
!uIo: AnfIcInfory bronch doos nof nIy fo monoy Ks.
PveventI4n / 44pevutI4n
Iron Trndo Iroducfs v. WIIkoff Co.
Incfs: ron Trade Products Co. (Plaintiff), contracted with Wilkoff Co. (Defendant), for the delivery of
rails at 41 a ton. Wilkoff did not deliver the rails. Plaintiff purchased them from another supplier at a
higher price, and sued for the difference from the contract price. The Supreme Court of
Pennsylvania affirmed judgment for the Plaintiff.
!uIo: Thnf n bnrgnIn furns ouf nof fo bo rofIfnbIo or onsy fo orform for ono nrfy fo fho confrncf
doos nof oxcuso fhnf nrfy from orformIng on fho confrncf. ThIs Is n ofonfInI rIsk of doIng busInoss,
nnd courfs wIII nof Inforforo In fhoso mnffors.
ow IngInnd Sfrucfuros v. !ornngor
Incfs: Whoro fhoro Is no ovIdonco fhnf fho formInnfIng nrfy ncfod In bnd fnIfh or dIshonosfIy, ho
mny dofond ngnInsf n bronch of confrncf ncfIon by rnIsIng nII grounds ho ossossos for formInnfIng
fho nrfIos` ngroomonf.
An oxcofIon fo fhIs ruIo occurs whoro fho non-formInnfIng nrfy dofrImonfnIIy roIIos on fho ronsons
sfnfod In fho nofIco of formInnfIon.
!uIo: Whoro fhoro Is no ovIdonco fhnf fho formInnfIng nrfy ncfod In bnd fnIfh or dIshonosfIy, ho
mny dofond ngnInsf n bronch of confrncf ncfIon by rnIsIng nII grounds ho ossossos for formInnfIng
fho nrfIos` ngroomonf.
An oxcofIon fo fhIs ruIo occurs whoro fho non-formInnfIng nrfy dofrImonfnIIy roIIos on fho ronsons
sfnfod In fho nofIco of formInnfIon.
RestItutI4n 14v P In de1uu!t
IrIffon v. Turnor
Incfs: lalnLlff conLracLed Lo work for one year for Lhe uefendanL where he would be pald $12300 aL
Lhe end of employmenL for servlces rendered 1he conLracL expllclLly sLaLed LhaL paymenL would be
glven aL Lhe end of Lhe year lalnLlff ceased worklng afLer nlne and a half monLhs and dld noL recelve
any compensaLlon from Lhe uefendanL 1here was no evldence LhaL Lhe uefendanL suffered any
damages as a resulL of lalnLlff's deparLure 1he Lrlal courL held LhaL Lhe lalnLlff was allowed Lo recover
under ls quanLum merulL clalm for Lhe reasonable value of Lhe labor he performed for Lhe uefendanL
uefendanL appealed
!uIo: Confrncf Inw roquIros fhnf n vIcfIm of n bronch bocomo whoIo ngnIn. To dony fho IInInfIff
bonofIfs from workIng wouId bo unfnIr nnd unjusf In Ifs oornfIon. If fho nrfy orforms ovor fho
dnmngos sufforod by fho fnIIuro fo comIofo sorvIcos, fhoro Is ronson fo ny fho nrfy for fho
ronsonnbIo worfh fhnf hns boon dono for fho ofhor nrfy`s bonofIf. Tho nrfy Is nof roquIrod fo ny
bocnuso ho Is snfIsfIod wIfh fho sorvIcos, buf ho Is roquIrod fo ny bocnuso fho cIrcumsfnncos comoI
hIm fo nccof fho sorvIcos comIofod. Moroovor, n hIrod Inboror shnII bo onfIfIod fo comonsnfIon for
sorvIcos orformod, ovon fhough ho wIII nof confInuo unfII fho ond of fho confrncf form. Thoroforo,
fho IInInfIff cnn rocovor for hIs sorvIcos In qunsI confrncf. Tho nmounf, whIch fho IInInfIff cnn
rocovor, Is fho bonofIf nnd ndvnnfngo fhnf fho nrfy fnkos from fho Inbor, In ofhor
KIrkInnd v. ArchboId
Incfs: Kirkland (Plaintiff) contracted to make repairs on Archbold's (Defendant's) home. After two
months, Defendant stopped Plaintiff from doing further work, and Plaintiff sued for the difference
between his expenses and the amount already paid by Plaintiff. The trial court found that Plaintiff
defaulted on the contract and denied recovery, and the Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed.
!uIo: Confrncf Inw frowns on unjusf onrIchmonf. !ndor fho fhoory of qunnfum moruIf, n nrfy Is
onfIfIod fo fho vnIuo of fho work ho hns orformod for fho bonofIf of nnofhor, ovon If ho hns dofnuIfod
on fho onfIro confrncf.
MIstuke, Imp4ssIbI!Ity, ImpvuctIcubI!Ity und IvustvutI4n
$u!e 41 G44ds: Tw4 Ium4us uses
Wood v. Ioynfon: Tho onIy ossIbIo ground for rocovory Is fhnf fhoro wns n mIsfnko mndo by fho
vondor In doIIvorIng nn nrfIcIo whIch wns nof fho nrfIcIo soId, n mIsfnko In fncf ns fo fho IdonfIfy of
fhIng soId wIfh fho fhIng doIIvorod.
Shorwood v. WnIkor: Tho rognnnf cow cnso. A bnrron cow Is n subsfnnfInIIy dIfforonf cronfuro fhnn
n broodIng cow.
Known Known
Known !nknown
!nknown unknown
TnyIor v. CnIdwoII
Incfs: MusIc hnII burns fo fho ground nnd Is wnnf monoy bnck for fho monoy fhoy wouId hnvo mndo.
!uIo: If confrncf orformnnco doonds on fho confInuod oxIsfonco of n orson or fhIng, nnd
fhnf orson or fhIng consos fo oxIsf, orformnnco mny bo oxcusod for ImossIbIIIfy of
orformnnco.
If fho nnfuro of fho confrncf Is such fhnf fho nrfIos musf hnvo known nf fho fImo of
confrncfIng fhnf If couId nof bo fuIfIIIod unIoss somo socIfIod fhIng confInuod fo oxIsf, If Is
nof n osIfIvo confrncf, nnd fhoro Is nn ImIIod condIfIon fhnf fho nrfIos wIII bo oxcusod
from orformnnco If fhnf fhIng consos fo oxIsf wIfhouf fnuIf of fho nrfIos. Howovor, If n
nrfy gIvos nn oxross or ImIIod wnrrnnfy fhnf fhnf fhIng wIII confInuo fo oxIsf, fhnf nrfy
Is IInbIo for bronch If If consos fo oxIsf.
TrnnsnfInnfIc InnncIng CorornfIon v. !nIfod Sfnfos
ncfs TrnnsnfInnfIc InnncIng CorornfIon confrncfod wIfh fho !nIfod Sfnfos fo shI
whonf from Toxns fo Irnn. Tho confrncf socIfIod fho dosfInnfIon, buf nof fho roufo. Tho
ordInnry roufo wouId fnko fho TrnnsnfInnfIc fhrough fho Suoz CnnnI. Howovor, duo fo
nrmod confIIcf, fho Suoz CnnnI hnd boon bIockod by Igyf. TrnnsnfInnfIc fhoroforo
rocoodod nIong fho roufo nround fho Cno of Cood Hoo. TrnnsnfInnfIc fhon suod fo
rocovor fho nddIfIonnI cosfs of fnkIng fho Iongor roufo.
!uIo Tho .C. CIrcuIf Courf of AonIs sofs forfh n fhroonrf fosf for ImossIbIIIfy l
somofhIng unoxocfod musf hnvo occurrod 2 fho rIsk of fho unoxocfod occurronco musf
nof hnvo boon nIIocnfod by confrncf or cusfom nnd 3 fho unoxocfod occurronco musf hnvo
rondorod orformnnco commorcInIIy ImrncfIcnbIo. Horo, fho fIrsf roquIromonf Is mof. Tho
usunI roufo from Toxns fo Irnn wouId bo fhrough fho Suoz CnnnI nnd Ifs cIosuro wouId bo
unoxocfod. Socond, fho rIsk doos nof nonr fo hnvo boon nIIocnfod In fho ngroomonf or by
cusfom fo ono nrfy ovor fho ofhor. InnIIy, fho orformnnco wns nof rondorod
commorcInIIy ImrncfIcnbIo. WhIIo fho cosf of goIng nround fho Cno of Cood Hoo wns
gronfor fhnn goIng fhrough fho Suoz CnnnI, fhoro wns no Incronsod rIsk fo fho crow or
goods. If Is nof nIwnys fho cnso fhnf cosf nIono mny novor consfIfufo ImrncfIcnbIIIfy, buf
horo, fho nddod oxonso Is nof sIgnIfIcnnf. Tho IInInfIff Is nIso In n boffor osIfIon fo
urchnso Insurnnco for fhIs confIngoncy ns n commorcInI shIor.
MInornI Inrk !nnd v. Hownrd
ncfs ngrood fo fho `s rIghf fo hnuI grnvoI nnd onrfh from I`s Innd. Tho `s ngrooIng fo
fnko fhorofrom nII of fho grnvoI nnd onrfh nocossnry In fho consfrucfIon of fho fIII nnd
comonf work on fho brIdgo, whIch roquIrod nn osfImnfod ll4,000 cubIc ynrds. ngrood fo
ny 5 confs for l
sf
80,000 ynrds, nnd fho noxf l0,000 froo of chnrgo. Tho rosf wns 5 confs
or ynrd.
fook onIy 50,l3l cubIc ynrds whIch wns fho onIy nrf fhnf wns nbovo wnfor IovoI. o
gronfor qunnfIfy couId hnvo boon fnkon by ordInnry monns or oxcof by fho uso, `s gronf
oxonso of socInI fooIs.
!uIo Whoro orformnnco doonds uon fho oxIsfonco of n gIvon fhIng, nnd such oxIsfonco
wns nssumod ns fho bnsIs of fho ngroomonf, orformnnco Is oxcusod fo fho oxfonf fhnf fho
fhIng consos fo oxIsf or furns ouf fo bo nonoxIsfonf.
A fhIng Is ImossIbIo In IognI confomInfIon whon If Is nof rncfIcnbIo nnd n fhIng Is
ImrncfIcnbIo whon If cnn onIy bo dono nf nn oxcossIvo nnd unronsonnbIo cosf.
KroII v. Honry
ncfs Honry ronfod ouf fho Is nnrfmonf fo wnfch fho coronnfIon rocossIon of Idwnrd VII. Tho
CoronnfIon dId nof fnko Inco. Honry hnd nId fho doosIf buf docIInod fo ny fho bnInnco on fho
ronf.
!uIo SInco fho K wns for n nrfIcuInr uroso nnd fhnf uroso couId nof bo nchIovod, fho K Is
nuIIIfIod.
OtLev PuvtIes
TLIvd Puvty Bene1IcIuvIes
!nwronco v. Iox
Incfs: Holly owed the Plaintiff $300. The Defendant asked to borrow $300 from Holly, and Holly
assented. n exchange for the loan, the Defendant promised to pay $300 to the Plaintiff the next day
to satisfy Holly's debt to the Plaintiff. The Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff sued to
recover the benefit promised to him under the contract between Holly and the Defendant.
!uIo: The law is clear "that a promise made to one for the benefit of another, he for whose benefit it
is made may bring an action for its breach. Here, Holly owed money to the Plaintiff and entered into
a contract with the Defendant whereby Holly would loan the Defendant money if the Defendant
agreed to pay the Plaintiff what Holly owed him. This agreement was not lacking in consideration,
because the consideration does not have to be between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. There
simply has to be consideration between the parties to the contract. Hence, the Plaintiff can maintain
this action against the Defendant.
Seaver v. Ransom
Facts: Mrs. Beman was near death and had her husband, udge Beman, draft a will that, among
other things, provided that udge Beman would receive her house for life with the remainder to the
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Before her death, Mrs. Beman changed
her mind and instead wanted the house to go to the Plaintiff, a niece, after her husband's death. Mrs.
Beman was too weak to wait for the preparation of another will and signed the one already drafted
upon the promise from udge Beman that he would leave the Plaintiff enough in his will to make up
the difference. Upon his death, it was discovered that udge Beman did not change his will for the
benefit of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff subsequently initiated this suit to enforce the promise made by
udge Beman to his wife.
Rule: Equitable principles require that the contract be enforced against the estate. The contract
made between Mrs. Beman and udge Beman for the Plaintiff to receive the house upon the udge
Beman's death binds the estate to perform on that promise. This complies with the general doctrine
that any third person, for whose direct benefit a contract was intended, could sue on it. Therefore,
the Plaintiff may enforce the contract made for her benefit.
!ucns v. Hnmm
Incfs:IInInfIffs, Infondod bonofIcInrIos of fho wIII of Iugono ImmIck, broughf n mnIrncfIco ncfIon
ngnInsf ofondnnf, fho Inw fIrm !.S. Hnmm, for ronrIng n wIII wIfh n rovIsIon fhnf wns hoId fo
vIoInfIong fho !uIo AgnInsf IorofuIfIos. ThIs nIIogod nogIIgonco dorIvod fhom of fho rocoods from
n rosIdunI frusf, nnd fhoy broughf n mnIrncfIco ncfIon ngnInsf ofondnnf whIch wns dIsmIssod by
fho Iowor courf. IInInfIffs now nonI.
!uIo: AIfhough ofondnnf hnd n dufy fo fho Infondod bonofIcInrIos ns woII ns fho cIIonf, buf ho
shouId nof bo IInbIo for hIs ronsonnbIo mIsfnko rognrdIng fho !uIo AgnInsf IorofuIfIos.
ssIgnment und e!egutI4n
IrIfIsh Wnggon v. !on
Incfs:
!uIo:
Ovu! 4ntvucts
NY Genevu! Ob!IgutI4n Iuw 5?01
NY Genevu! Ob!IgutI4n Iuw 5?03
& 2-201