This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: If so is he liable for the amount of the promissory note for 26,973 because the attorney rendered his services for Daigles divorce? The Holding : The contract between Daigle and the law firm is unenforceable. Daigle had the option to either carry out the contract or to avoid the entire transaction. Daigle to chose to avoid the transaction and he is not liable for the amount of 26,973.00 on the grounds of duress. Summary of your reasoning: Daigle was forced into signing a contract because he needed the service of the law firm. After day one for the trial, because McGowan threatened to withdraw his services Daigle signed the note under duress. The attorney practically forced him into signing the note. If McGowan had Daigle sign the note a week in advance the firm might have a justifiable case against Daigle....
View Full Document
- Spring '10