3200 midterm 09 for review 10 answers

3200 midterm 09 for review 10 answers - Business Law I 2009...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Business Law I 2009 Midterm Answer Outline General note: When grading, the notation “k” was often used to mean “contract.” 1. There are two distinct issues raised in this question and adequate discussion of both was required for an A range answer. Doing well with one issue and ignoring the other earned at best 22-23 pts. The alarm contract is between Oscar and Atlas. Therefore, to maintain the claim, Patsy must show that she is an intended third party beneficiary of the contract. This is the first issue in this question . Many students summarily concluded that Patsy is an intended beneficiary – to get full credit, you needed to outline the types of factors a court will use to make a decision and you needed to draw parallels to a case in the reading, preferably Fourth Ocean Putnam v. Interstate Wrecking Co. , Doe v. Wal-Mart , or Locke v. Ozark City Board of Education [case nugget, text at 504]. A party is NOT an intended third party beneficiary unless 1. The contract says she is; or 2. Performance runs to her; or 3. The contract in some other way makes it clear she is intended to benefit. In discussing the parties’ intent, it was important to consider what both parties might have intended. Many students focused only on Oscar – that he intended to protect his tenants’ goods, etc. Since Atlas is the party facing liability, it is more important to consider that party’s intent – in agreeing to the security contract, did Atlas anticipate that it would be responsible for protecting the tenants’ property? Many students argued that because Oscar made the alarm contract to protect the building , he intended to protect Patsy because she is a tenant. Given the discussion we had in class in reviewing the question from last year’s exam regarding beneficiaries who are not named in the contract, you needed a pretty good explanation to justify this conclusion. I saw at least one paper that talked about delegation of duties. At least this acknowledges the three parties involved and depending on how the student interprets the facts and explains the parties’ roles, might get them some partial credit. If Patsy has standing to enforce the alarm contract, it is not a given that she may recover all of her losses. This is the second issue that must be addressed . There are two ways to state the issue that I wanted discussed here and they both relate to the clause that limits liability to $1,000. As long as there was a good discussion of whether and why Patsy can recover only $1,000, exactly how you framed the analysis was not really important. For an A range grade you needed to note the factors relevant to making a determination and cite authority, ideally the UCC. Many students tried to argue that the UCC would not govern this contract since services are
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 6

3200 midterm 09 for review 10 answers - Business Law I 2009...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

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