Contracts §2, Fall 1996 Grading Form Professor Kalodner
Question I (50 points)
|
Enforceable Promise? |
|
|
HSG: Consid found in Ames bargaining for studying stated number of hours |
(8 pts) |
|
HSG: If no consid, Ames should reasonably have expected reliance in form of more study |
(8 pts) |
|
Ames: Not bargained for exchange but a gift on condition of more study |
(8 pts) |
|
Ames: Even if pms induced reliance, no justified compensable reliance damages |
(8 pts) |
|
Modification |
|
|
HSG: If consid, no modification because no new consideration |
(4 pts) |
|
HSG: If §90, reliance up to attempted modification makes initial promise enforceable |
(3 pts) |
|
Ames: If consid, HSG is right; if §90, what is “just” when so much reliance is after |
(4 pts) |
|
reduction and law students get rewarded for hard study by the market place |
(3 pts) |
|
Remedy |
|
|
On these facts, court would probably give expectation as only measurable damages |
(3 pts) |
|
Miscellaneous points |
(5 pts) |
|
TOTAL |
|
Question II (50 points)
|
1. Playtime v. Kids Network |
|
|
Network can argue that absence of any stated estimate makes it unenforceable |
(3 pts) |
|
Playtime will argue this is a requirements contract made enforceable by §2-306 |
(3 pts) |
|
Playtime will argue that order of zero is disproportionate to norm under §2-306 |
(5 pts) |
|
Network: damages can only be nonspeculative lost profits; query costs and future sales |
(5 pts) |
|
2a. Dribble v. Network at Common Law |
|
|
Dribble will demand expectation damages of 30 remaining wks X $5000=$150,000 plus |
|
|
his expected $5 per figure X probable sales of 1000 action figures sold per show |
|
|
or 30 X 1000 X $5 = $150,000 for total expectation damages of $300,000 |
(6 pts) |
|
Network, as to action figures, will argue speculativeness of continuing sales at this |
|
|
initial rate |
(5 pts) |
|
Network will argue that Dribble should have mitigated by accepting Live Action offer and |
|
|
that, at a minimum, that mitigation was worth 10 shows X $10,000 = $100,000 |
(5 pts) |
|
Dribble will respond by pointing out the differences in the shows and say not the same |
(5 pts) |
|
2b. Dribble v. Network under UCC |
|
|
Network will argue that under §2-708(1) Dribble’s damages are measured by difference |
|
|
between contract price ($5,000 per show) and market price ($10,000) which is higher |
|
|
therefore no damages under §2-708 or at least none for 10 shows offered by Live |
(4 pts) |
|
Dribble will argue that Kids Network breach, at the least, cost him foreseeable |
|
|
consequential damages in termination of sale of figures worth $5 each to him |
4 pts) |
|
Miscellaneous points |
(5 pts) |
|
TOTAL |
|
Comments: