ARE18 Homework4

ARE18 Homework4 - broken. Yes, there was a contract made...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
ARE18 January 30, 2011 Homework 4 8-8. In the case Kowalchuk vs. Stroup, a mother and son are suing a man who was managing their savings account for fraudulently or negligently handling them. They proceed to court asking for an award of $832,000, but before a decision was rendered by the court, Stroup offers the plaintiff a settlement of $285,000. The Kowalchuk's email accepting the offer and Stroup signs the settlement agreement and faxes it to them for theirs. Meanwhile, the NASD issues an award in the Kowalchuks' favor for $88, 788. Realizing Stroup offered them way too much, he tells the Kowalchuks that he is withdrawing his offer. Then the Kowalchuks sue him in a New York state court for breach of contract. The question is, did these parties even have a contract that could be
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: broken. Yes, there was a contract made between the two parties. Since email is considered instantaneous communication, it is assumed that the letter is read right away. Since the Kowalchuks emailed back a response to the settlement before the NASD's decision, the agreement made stands, and Stroup is held to the offer he made. If he tried to say that he did not receive the email before the verdict was reached, we could argue that he would not have faxed the paperwork. He is clearly in violation of the contract he originally made with the Kowalchuks and therefore the court ordered him to pay the remaining amount....
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online