Cornell Law - Contracts Outline (Summers, Fall 2004)

Cornell Law - Contracts Outline (Summers, Fall 2004) -...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CONTRACT OUTLINE OF CASES CASE, PG. # FACTS OF CASE RULE (in bold) HOLDING AUTHORITY TREATMENT RESTATEMENT TREATMENT UCC TREATMENT COMPARISON TO OTHER CASES OR MISC. CHAPTER 1 introduction 1. Contract and related Obligations A. The noncommercial specially drafted agreement. White v. Benkowski, 21 ¶ buys house w/o water. Contracts with neighbor, , contractual relationship breaks down with ¶ suing. Under compensatory damages, there are two damage theories: 1. general damages & 2. consequential damages, suffered specifically by the plaintiff. There is no punitive damages available in contracts 3 theories for contracting benefit 1. Efficiency 2. Planning 3. Quality in Society improves Misc. Discrete exchange – one type event Relational in nature – continuous interaction b/w parties. 2. Major Social Resources that Facilitate agreements and their performance 3. General Theories of obligation and remedies – an introduction A. Theories of obligation B. Remedies 4. Lost Expectancy – put the plaintiff in the monetary position he would have been in if the agreement had been performed. 5. Reliance – put the plaintiff in the monetary position he would have been in if the agreement had not been made 6. Restitution – give plaintiff the sum equivalent to the value of any benefit conferred by plaintiff unto the defendant. Sullivan v. O’Conner, 35 ¶ contracts with for a nose job. Suppose to have 2 operations and a good nose. End result, crappy nose and 3 operations. ¶ Could recover even though weak contract b/c fell into that middle ground false dichotomy of “contract - no contract” Not every breached contract provides full expectancy §1-106 remedies to be liberally administered through lost expectancy MINUS consequential or special damages, unless can obtain through other law. Illustrates: No firm contract Consideration disproportion to full expectancy damages Expectancy damages difficult to measure Restitution too meager leaves reliance damages. 2. CHAPTER 2 General theories of obligation (duty to perform) 7. Theories of obligation and their relevance to the lawyer’s role a. Agreement with consideration bargain for agreement to either detriment or gain b. Promissory Estoppel c. Unjust Enrichment 8. Obligation Arising from an agreement with consideration – the leading theory Restatement 1 §75 – definition of consideration: 1
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
CONTRACT OUTLINE OF CASES CASE, PG. # FACTS OF CASE RULE (in bold) HOLDING AUTHORITY TREATMENT RESTATEMENT TREATMENT UCC TREATMENT COMPARISON TO OTHER CASES OR MISC. i. An act other than a promise, or a forbearance, or creation, modification of legal relations, or return promise bargained for and given in exchange of promise ii. Consideration may be given either to promisor or a third party 9. Hardesty v. Smith, 47 ¶ sues for refusing to pay on the notes given to the lamp inventor. contents that the trademark bough is worthless Unless explicitly contracted for, buyers
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/12/2008 for the course LAW 5041 taught by Professor Summers during the Fall '07 term at Cornell University (Engineering School).

Page1 / 55

Cornell Law - Contracts Outline (Summers, Fall 2004) -...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

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