SoF II - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

sof ii n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
SoF II PowerPoint Presentation
play fullscreen
1 / 29
SoF II
226 Views
Download Presentation
brendy
Download Presentation

SoF II

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. SoF II Contracts – Prof Merges March 3, 2011

  2. Statute of Frauds • “Within the statute”? • “Satisfies the statute?”

  3. Richard v. Richard

  4. Richard v. Richard • Where are we procedurally? • What are the facts?

  5. Facts • Alleged oral agreement to purchase a home • Any writing at all?

  6. Additional facts • Weekly payments to father (Norman) in addition to rent payments • Total: about $5000

  7. Improvements • New doors • Bannister • Floors, other things

  8. Opinion • Begin with an exception to the S o F • Part performance

  9. What does part performance demonstrate?

  10. What does part performance demonstrate? • Shows existence of the K – why begin performing if there is no K? • Also (or in the alternative), a question of fairness: protecting the reliance interest, preventing unjust enrichment

  11. What are the elements of the part performance exception? • Possession • Improvements • Pmt of substantial part of purchase price

  12. Are these all required? Or any one of the 3? • A, B, and C: additive • A, B, OR C: alternative • Necessary/sufficient?

  13. Possession • Present here? • What is the issue? • What does the court say?

  14. Improvements • Will any improvements do? • What else is required?

  15. Partial payment • How much is enough? • How much here? What was Norman’s argument? What did the court say?

  16. UCC 2-201 • The Code’s S o F • Basic rule; 2-201(2), reasonable time requirement for response to a merchant’s confirmation

  17. St. Ansgar Mills, Inc. v Streit • History • Facts

  18. 2-201(1) and (2) • PP. 285-286

  19. At issue here • “confirmation within a reasonable time” provision of 2-201(2) • Other cases: was the time frame here reasonable? – p. 293

  20. Why did Dist Ct rule as it did? • Facts and circumstances here

  21. Estoppel and the UCC • Statutory drafting and unintended effects

  22. Monarco v Lo Greco • History • Facts

  23. Facts! • Christie vs. Carmen

  24. Policy • Reliance • Restitution

  25. Record/writing requirement • “All essential terms” vs. “memorandum of agreement”

  26. But even the UCC’s quantity term is liberally described • Mis-stated quantity term irrelevant to overall enforceability; enforcement limited to quantity stated, however • UCC § 2-201, Comment 1