assignment 1 buss law.docx - BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND...

This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 3 pages.

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND LAW / BAFN 332 SPRING 2020 ASSIGNMENT 1 1. CASE: RAS Builders Inc v Ecluid and Commonwealth Associates 2. Relevant facts I. Euclid and Commonwealth Associates is the owner of a shopping center in Aurora that will be leased, in January 1994, for seven years to Child Care Centers. Sevo Miller is in charge to manage the property. II. A very important fact is that in the contract between Euclid and Child Care Centers it is specifically said that “all interior construction would be done at Child Care Centers’ cost and expenses, been wholly responsible to all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, and materialmen”. So, with this, we can understand that even though Euclid and Associates, as the owners, have to be aware of the plans to approve or reject them, they will be out of any liability between any relationships that could exist between Child Care Centers and a contractor. III. Euclid agreed to pay Child Care Centers (tenant) $60,000 toward remodeling if the tenant would have met certain conditions, and not defaulted in payment. IV. Child Care Centers entered into a contract with RAS Builders, Inc. to construct/remodel the center. The price was $101,840; more than what Euclid gave them to help Child Care Center with any reconstruction. They experienced financial troubles leaving them with no financial support to pay either RAS for their work performed nor Euclid for the rent. By September 1994, they filed bankruptcy protection. V. RAS filed a suit against Euclid, Sevo Miller, and Child Care Centers. According to RAS, they claimed it is unjust enrichment of the construction of the center against Euclid.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture