Contracts §3, Fall 1999 Grading Form Professor Kalodner

Question I (35 points)

A: Contract and breach, consideration to be found in value that Brush would have gotten from the publicity attending the "auctioning" of his work..................................................................	(8 pts)
B: I was responding to a request for a charitable donation which I agreed to make; it was never more than a gift on my part; no consideration and therefore unenforceable	(8 pts)
A: If no consideration, then certainly B, in promising a painting, should have known that we would rely by going ahead with all of our plans and that reliance, under §90 make his promise, in the interest of justice, enforceable	(8 pts)
B: Assuming I should have known they would rely on my promise, A expended no money in reliance on it; there is no evidence they had another artist who would have contributed a painting and there is no evidence of what my work, or the work of another would have been worth in the auction; any damage theory is so speculative that justice would not be served by a damage award against me in A's favor	(8 pts)
Miscellaneous	(3 pts)

Total Question I (of 35 pts)............................ ______

Question II (35 points)

O: Our contract is a valid requirements contract under UCC 2-306, with the necessary element of an estimate of probable requirement; the agreement even included the element of exclusivity of source of supply of the oats C will agree that the original agreement met the terms of 2-306 and was valid	(4 pts)
O: We are entitled to payment under UCC 2-709 for the price of 200bu@$100/bu C will agree that this payment is owed to O under the UCC and the contract	(5 pts)
O: We are entitled to the difference between the market price and the contract price for the balance of the oats which Cereals would be buying under the contract for the remainder of the contract period under UCC 2-708(1); in the alternative, assuming that the market price is equal to or greater than the contract price, we are entitled to our lost profits under UCC 2-708(2)	(8 pts)
C: The arguments advanced by O under UCC 2-708 involve excessive speculation and should not be allowed; after all, the monthly quantity had gone down to an order of 50bu without protest from O; who knows what the quantity might have been, month by month over the balance of the period left under the contract	(5 pts)
C: Whatever damages we might owe you, under either 2-709 or 2-708 or both, we are entitled to an offset under restitutionary theory for our cost of the redesign of our box at your request and to your benefit	(5 pts)
O: You are not entitled to an offset because you agreed to a modification of the contract and agreed to the redesign as part of your payment for the requirements contract, valid under UCC 2-209 without consideration; also, your cost is not a valid measurement of our gain under restitution; there is no way to value the benefit to us, if there were any	(5 pts)
Miscellaneous	(3 pts)

Total Question II (of 35 pts)........................... ______

COMMENTS: