100%(3)3 out of 3 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 4 pages.
The preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 4 pages.
Jentry GraysonBSAD 4210Assignment 1May 11, 2016I have read in entirety the two cases that I have briefed below. – JGPART 1:Chapter 1:Case:Landsberg v. Selchow & Richter Company, 802 F.2d 1193Facts: Plaintiff-Appellee: Mark LandsbergDefendants-Appellants: Scrabble Crossword Game Players INC., Selchow & RictherCompany, and Crown Publishers, Inc.Landsberg wrote a book on strategies to win the game of Scrabble. He gave Scrabblethe manuscript of the book in order to receive the company’s logo to be a part of thebook. Scrabble then wrote another book based off of Lansberg’s and gave nocompensation to him concerning the book or the logo that was asked for in the firstplace.Issue:Did Landsberg and Scrabble have an implied-in-fact contract?Holding:The court decided that there was a contract formed between Landsberg andS&R Company. This contract had been violated by the defendants.Majority Opinion Reasoning:Goodwin, Circuit Judge.Rule:California law allows for recover for the breach of an implied-in-fact contract whentherecipient of a valuable idea accepts the information knowing that compensation is expected,and subsequently uses the idea without paying for it. If in fact Landsberg had givendisclosure of the manuscript before there was any form of known compensation, then therewould have been no contract implied. It would have failed under California law.B.Application:In the case, the district court found that Landsberg’s first disclosure was confidential and forthe unique purpose of receiving approval to use the Scrabble mark inside his manuscript. Hehad also expressed the intention of producing his manuscript to sell commercially. This