1-14-10 - NOTES 1-14-10 5th Edition preferable, double...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
NOTES 1-14-10 5 th Edition preferable, double check online book -The law should be something we aspire to, but can never be fully attained -The law can’t demand absolute unselfishness Dudley/Stephens Case -Some historians argue that it was only because that there was such a huge public outcry that the death sentence was reduced to a few months of labor. German man named Armin Meud posted on the Internet that he wanted to meet and eat someone. Man consented and let Armin eat him. But only got 8.5 years in jail. -leads back to the case of consent and how should it affect the law -Cyberspace is slowly being caught up by law Williams v. Walker Thomas Furniture Company (contract law) -If there is an offer and acceptance with no coercion and fraud, courts must uphold the contract. -“Where the element of unconscionability be made, the contract should not be enforced.” –Judge unconscionability – when the courts do NOT enforce contracts due to the fact that it heavily favors one party and not the other Williams bought a stereo for $60, but missed out on a payment. Company wanted to take back all the items. Government gave Williams monthly check of $218, which was used to raise herself and her 7 children. Court did not enforce the contract. Unconscionability signifies the absence of meaningful choice on the part of one of the
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 / 2

1-14-10 - NOTES 1-14-10 5th Edition preferable, double...

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