Statute of frauds is weaker because it lets you cancel contracts that aren’t finished yet If you have a verbal deal and change your mind then you can cancel because you never put it in writing, if job is performed then you have to pay even though nothing was in writing If you are tenant and you are studying abroad and want to bring someone else in or if you hire another company to build your house then the homebuilder can subcontract a lot of other jobs to bring other people in for the job Substitution once contracts are made General rule: legally ok to make substitutions once you sign a contract unless the original contract prohibits it If landlord or other person isn’t happy you can usually still do it because legally speaking its okay If there is a problem caused by the new person or if damage is caused or doesn’t pay rent then the landlord or other person on side of the deal has a choice of who to sue Almost always the landlord will sue the original person because they know a whole lot about the original person Reason to be very selective on new person you are bringing in Novation Safe way to sublease an apartment or bring in a substitution for job If you sign it then you aren’t responsible for anything the new person does Other side of contract doesn’t have to give you a novation They can make you pay for a novation
Lecture 7: Contract Damages, Vague Contracts, Intellectual Property Contract lawsuits--Compensatory but not punitive Compensatory damages for contract law Direct Hawkins vs. McGee Hawkins was a soldier in WWI and there was wiring in trenches and he was burned Hawkins was burned on wire McGee was doctor In the contract he signed he said in writing he will make a 100% perfect hand Hawkins wasn’t happy with the results of the surgery Jury has to say in dollars what a 100% perfect hand is worth and that is what Hawkins was promised and from that subtract out the value of a hairy hand (result of surgery) and difference should be rewarded in direct damages Difference between what contract claims you will receive and what you actually receive Consequential Foreseeable harm standard Prutch vs. Ford Prutch ordered a tractor from Ford Several monthly payments then get tractor in the fall Tractor was delivered but it didn’t start and had a bad part It took a while to get the right part Asked for direct and consequential damages Direct—shipping fees for parts, all costs associated with the tractor
Consequential—to cover their lost crops, this was foreseeable harm that should have been predicted so awarded damages Jacobs & Young vs. Kent
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 35 pages?
- Spring '08
- The Land, the deal