Contracts Final - Bargain Principle Breach of Contract Kirksey A mere gift or gratuity cannot be enforced as a contract Reliance Promissory

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Bargain Principle : Breach of Contract Kirksey : A mere gift or gratuity cannot be enforced as a contract. Reliance : Promissory Estoppel Elements: D makes a promise to P P relies on D’s promise to her detriment P’s reliance is reasonable and foreseeable Ricketts : Plaintiff relied on the promise to her detriment. Restitution : Unjust Enrichment Elements: P confers a benefit. P confers the benefit w/ expectation of payment, not as a gift. P acts in good faith, not officiously. D actually benefits/wants the benefit D must notify P if he become aware of the benefit and does not want it. Sceva : Cannot contract w/ an incapacitated person. Must show that a benefit was conferred in good faith, and was not acting officiously, e.g. had a good reason for not appointing a guardian and forming a contract. Must also show that the service was not as a gift and that payment was expected. Dews : Quasi-contract, or K implied in law. One should not be able to retain a benefit, conferred in good faith at the expense of another, without paying for it. If that person is aware a benefit is being conferred and doesn’t want to pay for it, he has an obligation to notify the conferrer. Contract Formation Difference and Meaning in Communication OBJECTIVE THEORY Embry : Objective Theory of Interpretation: Reasonable man in the P’s position. If a reasonable man would interpret a K as having been formed then a K exists U.S. Steel : Objective Theory of Interpretation: Reasonable man socially situated. Uses a reasonable man w/ the same social identity as the recipient. Moral boosting statements can’t be reasonably interpreted as intent to form a K. K IMPLIED IN FACT; K IMPLIED IN LAW Steffes : A K implied in Fact can be found where services are rendered at the instance and request of the recipient and the recipient is aware of the service rendered. A K implied in Law can also be found for the sake of justice. SUBJECTIVE THEORY: DOCTRINE OF MISUNDERSTANDING Konic : Rest. §20(1)(a) both parties have different meanings for a term and neither has a reason to suspect a different meaning to have been attached by the other. Izadi : Rest §20(2)(a). If one party, knowing the other’s meaning manifests assent, only to insist on a different meaning later on, he may be guilty of misrepresentation (bait n’ switch). K is binding according to the innocent party’s perception of what the terms meant. Acedo: Rest §20(2)(b). She had reason to know the meaning of the term attached by the other party. A party who is of normal intelligence and who voluntarily accepts to unambiguous terms cannot be relieved from K based on argument that she did not completely understand the K.
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Elements of an Offer: Offeror/Offeree Price Quantity (mandatory for UCC, express or ascertainable) Time Terms Words of Promise An Offer is NOT: Expression of opinion or prediction Statement of intentions, hopes, or desires
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.

This note was uploaded on 04/30/2008 for the course CONTRACTS 1 taught by Professor Daicoff during the Fall '06 term at Florida Coastal School of Law.

Page1 / 5

Contracts Final - Bargain Principle Breach of Contract Kirksey A mere gift or gratuity cannot be enforced as a contract Reliance Promissory

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