FINAL EXAM NOTES

FINAL EXAM NOTES - notes for business law.

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Cynthia Eloisa 10-25-10 We said that the offers even with promises will not be revoke with the firm offer provision of the code Now we have the exception to the exception where we have an acceptance following a rejection then regardless of the conclusion that we will come to under provision the 1 st of the 2 to be communicated to the offeror governs Hypo: suppose that offeror who is a merchant offers to sell goods to someone 1000 widgets $1 for it the offer is to remain open for 30 days. So let’s further assume that the offeree gets letter in day 5 on day 6 the offeree mails offeror a rejection and received by offeror on day 10 on day 7 the offeree mails the offeror an acceptance and that is received by offeror on day 11—question: do we have a contract? Wrong answer: normally we will think okay we have a rejection (is effective on communication this hipo is day 10) if the offeree accepted by a reasonable mead of communication then the acceptance will not be effective on day 11 under the dispatched rule it will be effective when it was mailed—ordinary logic the acceptance happening on dispatch the rejection on communication we have a contract. But it does not go the other way. Right answer: Acceptance following a prior rejection in time the 1 st of the 2 to be communicated governs. Therefore there is no contract NEXT CHAPTER Students screw this up every semester? Yes Why? They have lousy notes Chapter 10 “Mutual assent” the issue is do we have a contract? To answer we use the objective standard In chapter 11 “Conduct invalidating assent” we are asking the question is there a defense? In this chapter we are going to have general rule ”subjective standard” But there are 2 exceptions to it. Within the 2 exceptions we are going to use ___Objective___ In larger classes am I going to have students screw this up? Yes it is going to happen Let’s go back to what do we mean by objective test: what would a reason third party conclude if they looked at the words and actions of the parties If offeror I will sell you my copy of textbook for $75. And the offeree intends to say “no” but in fact messes up and shakes his head yes. quest: do we have a contract? Yes b/c a reasonable 3 rd person would conclude from the offer and offeree shaking yes meaning we have a contract In real world we have thousands cases with this situation. We have two people that neither of them is lying The subjective test: turns on what is going on in the minds of the participants. And in almost of all situations where we are asking the question is there a defense to a contract we are going to use a subjective test how do we know what’s going on in their mind? We try to infer by their conduct and answers. There are however 2 defenses where instead of using the subjective test to see if defense applies
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.

This note was uploaded on 10/21/2011 for the course ECON 301 taught by Professor Thompson during the Spring '11 term at Loyola Maryland.

Page1 / 26

FINAL EXAM NOTES - notes for business law.

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