sec 3 outline - Contracts Outline CH 1 Sec 3 Alternative...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Contracts Outline CH 1 Sec 3 Alternative Interests- Reliance and Restitution I. Restitution Damages a. Awarded to compensate for the benefit conferred on the other party b. One cannot get restitution damages if there is a valid, enforceable contract i. He gets Expectancy damages if calculable ii. He gets Reliance damages if incalculable c. One can recover when the contract is unenforceable for Quasi-Contract i. Where benefit has been conferred and court implies a promise to pay ii. Suing Off the contract iii. 3 types of Quasi-Contracts: 1. Work and Labor done (Quantum Meruit) 2. Goods Sold and Delivered (Quantum Valebat) 3. Money Had and Received iv. Note: can’t recover for any of these if the K has been fully performed II. Situations of Unenforceable Contracts a. Statute of Frauds i. Requires written contract in 4 cases: 1. Land Contracts (Real Estate) 2. Third Party Guarantees 3. Longer than one year to Perform 4. Sale of Goods over $500 5. (Outdated: Contracts in contemplation of marriage) ii. Boone v Coe- Guy moves from Kentucky to TX to work and live on Coe’s land 1. Quasi Contract: Quantum Meruit 2. Statute of Frauds: K is impossible to perform in 1 year 3. Old Rule for Conflict of Laws: More than 1 state has relationship with contract a. If it dealt with performance, it was place of performance (TX) b. If it dealt with forming of contract, its where it was formed (KY) 4. If D received a benefit, than an exception may be made to the enforcement of the oral contract a. At least where the plaintiffs had relied to their substantial detriment b. D received no benefit from P’s performance 5. Liberal View: Necessity of benefit conferred may come from doing as requested 6. Court: the KY guy lost a. No enforceable contract because it was oral and violated the S of F b. Had the KY guy proved they conferred a benefit on the ranch owner, they may have been able to claim Quasi-K and receive Restitution i. He did not do this though 7. NOTE: If a K is unenforceable b/c of S of F, P can’t get Expectancy or Reliance damages; can’t sue on the K. Can sue in Quasi-K for Restitution IF can prove benefit conferred upon D. D needn’t even have promised to pay for this benefit; if conferred, court will imply a promise to pay iii. Kearns v Andree- P was selling house to D
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
1. P was going to sell his house to D but D wanted certain changes made regarding the paint and wallpaper, so P did it, and D didn’t end up getting house 2. Contract was unenforceable, so no expectancy or reliance damages 3. Benefit Conferred Rule: benefit conferred if D requested it a. Gets Restitution Damages because P painted the house per D’s request
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 5

sec 3 outline - Contracts Outline CH 1 Sec 3 Alternative...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online