Assignment 1 - Week#1 Contract Law(ch 11 A contract is...

This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 3 pages.

Philip Gray BSAD 4210 Assignment 1 I have the entire case for both Landsberg v. Selchow & Richter Company and Glende Motor Company v. Superior Court. - PG PART I Chapter 1 Case: Landsberg v. Selchow & Richter Company, 802 F.2d 1193 (1986) Facts: Mark Landsberg had the idea of creating a book that would give readers strategies and tips on how to win at the game “Scrabble”. Landsberg contacted Selchow & Richter Company, the company that owned and trademarked “Scrabble”, to obtain approval to use the trademark in producing the book and Landsberg sent Selchow & Richter Company a manuscript of the book upon S&R’s request. The 2 parties were in negotiations which ultimately ended with no deal in place, but Selchow & Richter Company later released their own guide which had the same premise as the one set forth by Landsberg. Landsberg sued the company for copyright infringement stating that S&R used his idea and created their own book. Landsberg stated that there was an implied-in-fact contract that S&R broke and he was owed restitution. The original court sided with Landsberg and now S&R is appealing that decision. Issue: Is S&R liable for infringing on Landsberg’s rights by creating a book based off of his idea despite no contract ever being agreed upon? Holding: Yes S&R did infringe up Landsberg’s rights and ideas and only negotiated with him long enough to gather enough information to write their own book and is liable for damages and compensation to Landsberg. A. Rule: S&R did infringe upon Landsberg’s rights and ideas and there was an implied-in-fact contract in place due to the fact that Landsberg sent his manuscript for the sole reason of gaining permission to use the trademark. He did not divulge the information freely and due to the fact that his ideas were used in the book S&R is liable. Additionally, the amount that Landsberg was awarded may have been a little high, but it was allowable under California Law. B. Application: In this case the appeal by S&R is unfounded and the Appeals Court sides with Landsberg. S&R used his ideas and profited from it without his approval and is liable for the compensation that the lower courts ruled that S&R owed Landsberg for restitution. Chapter 2 Case: Glende Motor Company v. Superior Court, 159 Cal.App.3d 389, 205 Cal. Rptr. 682 (1984) Facts: Glende Motor Company was a seller of cars who had filed an insurance claim after a fire at his leased property. Glende MC stated that they were owed for unpaid fire insurance money and was suing the leasors for that money. Once proceedings were started, but before phase two of proceedings had started Glende was presented an “Offer to Compromise Before Trial” by the defendents. Glende stated that he would accept the terms only if a new lease could be drawn up as well. At that point Glende filed a " Plaintiff's Notice of Acceptance of Offer to Compromise " to accept the terms, but was later informed that the defendant’s bank (United California Bank) had revoked the offer to compromise, but it was too late for Glende as they had

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture