Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Business law > Chapter 13: Capacity and Genuine Assent > Flashcards

Chapter 13: Capacity and Genuine Assent Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

Contractual capacity

A

The ability to understand a contract is being made and to understand it’s general meaning

Everyone presumed to have capacity unless it is proven that capacity is lacking or there is a status incapacity

Can exist even if party does not completely understand the contract

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Status incapacity

A

Classes of persons declared by law to lack contractual capacity.

Incapacity protects these classes by giving them power to get out of an unwise contract

(Has been used for discriminatory and punative status)

  • minors
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Peddy v Montgomery

A

Statute that said married women cannot sell land without husband’s consent deemed unconstitutional due to equal protection under the law

Montgomery made a contract to sell land to Peddy
But her husband did not consent so she didn’t fulfill the contract
Peddy sued
Montgomery claimed the statute
Peddy asserted statute unconstitutional

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Factual incapacity

A

When a person does not have the mental capacity to understand a contract to a reasonable expense due to a mental condition (medication, drugs, alcohol, illness, age.)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Minors

A
  • anyone under 18 years of age (day before birthday rule)
  • may make contracts
  • contracts voidable (with some exceptions) at the election of a minor
  • minor may affirm (ratify) the contract on attaining majority by performance, express approval, or lapse without avoidance
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Avoidance

A

Aka disaffirm

Any expression of an intention to repudiate the contract or any act inconsistent with the continuing validity of the contract

Only applicable during minority and for a “reasonable” time after attaining majority

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Minor’s misrepresentation of age

A

Varies by state

  • some states misrepresentation by minor = fraud that bars contract avoidance
  • in others can still disaffirm but may have to pay damages

Other party may disaffirm due to the fraud

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Restitution by a minor after avoidance

A

(if minor must return anything to other party)

If original consideration intact: must return or offer to return it or the other party (status quo ante)

If original consideration damaged/destroyed/used up: only required to return whatever remains. (Or nothing. But some trend to limit this)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Recovery of property by minor on avoidance

A

Other contracting part must return any money or property received or the monetary value of property if property isn’t recoverable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Necessaries

A

Things indispensable or absolutely necessary for the sustenance of human life

Food
Clothing
Lodging
Health
Education
Comfort
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Contracts for necessaries & minors

A

A minor can disaffirm a contract for necessaries but must pay the reasonable value for necessaries furnished

  • when necessities provided to parent/guardian for minor, minor is not liable (contract between adults)
  • medical care: common law says parent is liable but child can be held liable for necessary expenses if parent is unable or unwilling to pay
  • minor can bind self in contract for necessaries otherwise may not be able to access
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Schmidt v. Prince George’s hospital

A
  • emergency medical care for unidentified 16-yo
  • insurance check issued, but used to pay for a car
  • minor sued by hospital for costs on attainment of majority
  • decision for hospital
  • doctrine of necessaries
  • parents showed unwilling to pay (using insurance money for car)- so daughter liable
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Ratification of a former minor’s voidable contact

A

Ratification: any words or conduct of the former minor manifesting an intent to be bound by the contract terms. Some states may require written ratification/ declaration

Can only happen after attaining majority or still voidable

Once ratified upon majority the contract cannot them be disaffirmed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Contracts minors may not avoid

A

Can vary by state statute:

  • educational loans
  • contracts for medical care
  • contracts made while running a business
  • contracts approved by a court
  • contracts made in performance of a legal duty
  • contracts relating to bank accounts, insurance policies, or corporate stock
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Liability of a third person for a minors contract

A

Parent: not generally liable unless child makes contract as agent of parent. Liable for value of necessaries supplied to child deserted by said parent

Cosigner: someone who signs with another to make the contract more acceptable. Bound by contract independently from the minor. If minor disaffirms, cosigner still bound

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Mentally incompetent

A

To rescind a contract made by an incompetent person a guardian must demonstrate that the person was suffering from a mental illness/defect that made them incapable of comprehending the nature of the transaction

If established mentally incompetent may avoid contract in same manner as minor and ratify or disaffirm if later declared competent

Person or their estate is liable for the reasonable value of all necessities furnish

Contract still building if terms and circumstances reasonable and person is unable to restore other party to status quo ante

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Mentally incompetent persons with a guardian

A

Contract made before guardian appointed: guardian may ratify or disaffirm contract

Contract made after guardian appointed: contract is void

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Incapacity due to intoxicarion

A

If the party knows the contact was being made: intoxication does not affect validity of the contract

If so intoxicated that doesn’t know the contact was being made the contract is voidable on becoming sober, but an unreasonable delay before voiding contract may prevent voiding the contact

Excessive intoxication viable defense of casino patron

Impairment by other drugs same treatment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

LaBarbera v Wynn Las Vegas

A
  • LaBarbera lost significant money (own + gaming credit) at Wynn casino
  • original court judged in favor of casino as voluntary intoxication is not a defence
  • appeal resulted in case being remanded for a new trial
  • intoxication may render person incomplete
  • burden of proof on the person claiming incompetence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Unilateral mistake

A

Mistake made by one party to a contract

Does NOT affect contract when the mistake is unknown to the other contracting party

Party who made the mistake may avoid the contract if the other party knew/ should have known about the mistake

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Mutual mistake of fact or law

A

When both parties enter into a contract under a mutually mistaken understanding (of fact or law)

Contract voidable by the adversely affected party if the mistake has a material effect on the exchange

22
Q

Mutual mistake in judgment

A

Contract is not voidable

23
Q

Reformation

A

Remedy by which a written instrument is corrected when it fails to express the actual intent of both parties, because of fraud, accident or mistake

24
Q

Mistake in transcription or printing of a contract

A

Parties may petition court to reform document to reflect actual agreement

Must prove that a mistake was made

25
Q

Shurgard storage centers v. Lipton-U city llc

A
  • agreement regarding lease of a self storage facility with the option to sell
  • shurgard (seller) sent an email that included Lipton (buyer) outlining purchase option at an annualized amount
  • lease submitted did not contain language about annualized amount, Lipton represented this as a negotiation on his part
  • Lipton sought to purchase based on terms in contract
  • shurguard rejected offer. Filed suit over misunderstanding in price terms
  • judgement for shurguard. Lipton knew, or should have known about the mistake
26
Q

Contracts made under deception

A

Means there is no true assent- contract may be voided at innocent party’s option

27
Q

Tort

A

Civil wrong that interferes with one’s property or person

28
Q

Fraud

A

Making of a false statement of a past or existing fact, with knowledge of it’s falsify or with reckless indifference as to it’s truth, with the intent to cause another to rely thereon, and such person does rely thereon and is harmed thereby

Material misrepresentation of a fact

  • with knowledge of it’s falsity/ reckless indifference to truth
  • intent that the listener rely on the misrepresented fact
  • result that the listener does rely on it
  • listener harmed as a consequence

Misrepresentation that would induce a reasonable person to assent to a contract

29
Q

Puffery

A

Meaningless superlatives that no reasonable person would take seriously

30
Q

Fraud vs statement of opinion or value

A

Generally matters of opinion of value/ opinion about future events not fraud (forecasting not fraud or fact but speculation)

Is fraud if speaker knows of facts that make the opinion false

31
Q

Cansinos v bank of america

A
  • cansinos home valued at 620k by b of a appraiser in 2005
  • took our a mortgage based on the belief that the home value would increase
  • home value instead significantly decreased
  • cansinos brought fraud action against b of a
  • both trial court and appeal court found against the cansinos - market value had just been prediction, not fact, no fraud involved
32
Q

Justifiable reliance on statement

A

Fraudulent statement doesn’t matter unless other party relies on it being truthful
- fraud only counts if injured party was specifically relying on fraudulent statement

33
Q

Disclaimer of reliance clauses

A

State that no representations have been made to the buyer

Generally buyers cannot assert justifiable reliance on statements by sellers that contradict clear and specific terms of written contracts

34
Q

Proof of harm

A

Required for an individual to recover damages from fraud

If can prove may receive coverage of actual losses

Also punative damages if fraud is gross/oppressive

Injuries party can have the court order the recession or cancelation of a contract induced by fraud

35
Q

Novare group v sarif

A
  • purchasers bought condo units that brokers claimed would have “spectacular views”
  • sued when found out the company knew about a development that would block the views
  • case unsustainable because written contract clearly stated that views might change over time and included a disclaimer that oral representations could not be relied upoj
36
Q

Negligent misrepresentation

A

Speaker failed to exercise due care regarding information communicated to listener (but did not intend to deceive)

If results in harm to the listener contract is voidable by injured party. Actual damages mat be claimed

If fraud is proven(intent) then punative damages could be awarded as well

Suits often claim both fraud and negligent misrepresentation

37
Q

Nondisclosure

A

Under certain circumstances nondisclosure may make a contract voidable - mostly cases of active concealment

38
Q

General rule of liability for nondisclosure

A

Generally a party has no duty to volunteer information to the other party in the formation of a contract

39
Q

Exceptions to general rule of nonliability for nondisclosure

A

Unknown defect or condition: duty in some states for seller who knows of a serious defect or condition to disclose if it is of such a nature that it is unlikely the other person would discover it

Confidential relationship: if parties stand in a confidential relationship failure to disclose information may be fraudulent (attorneys with knowledge material to client’s interest)

Active concealment: hiding information or knowingly supplying wrong information constitutes fraud (includes concealing by action)

40
Q

Confidential relationshop

A

Relationship in which, because of the legal status of the parties or their respective physical or mental conditions or knowledge, one party places full confidence and trust in the other

41
Q

Puget Sound Service Corp v. Dalarna Management

A
  • dalarna Management has building with visible water damage
  • building bought by Puget Sound who then sued because Dalarna hadn’t disclosed the extent of the leaks
  • judgement for Dalarna - leaks were not concealed, was on the buyer to ask question to ascertain extent of the damage
42
Q

Pressure

A

What appears to be agreement may not be voluntary because one party was under undue influence, or physical or economic duress

43
Q

Undue influence

A

Influence that is asserted upon another person by one who dominates that person
(Imbalance of power, confidential relationship)

May be apparent that the more helpless party was not exercising free will in making the contract but following the will of another

Undue influence presumed when dominating person obtains benefit from contract made with dominated person. Contract is voidable

Have to determine persuasion vs undue influence/ lack of free will

44
Q

Moore v. Moore

A
  • parents owned farming operation
  • on father’s death mother exploited by her son into contract favorable to son and grandson
  • original judgement for son
  • appeal judgement for mother

When persons in a confidential relationship enter into a contract the burden rests on the person in whom confidence has been placed (son) to show that transaction was in good faith/ no undue influence

  • remanded for bench trial, jury had not been properly instructed
45
Q

Fisher v. Schefers

A
  • Lentner in nursing home but owned farm
  • Schefer visited often in home and convinced him to sell farm, aided in the transaction
  • guardian appointed after sale (Fisher) sought to set aside transaction due to undue influence
  • judgement for Schefers. No undue influence established, Lentner still acting of own free will
46
Q

Physical duress

A

Threat of physical harm to person or property

Contract made to avoid threatened harm is voidable at victim’s election

(Great reluctance is not the same as duress)

47
Q

Economic duress

A

Threat of financial loss

Where one in induced by a wrongful act or threat of another to make a contract under circumstances that deprive one of the exercise of one’s own free will

(Holding necessary product hostage)

48
Q

Duress

A

Conduct that deprives the victim of free will and generally gives the victim the right to set aside any transaction entered into under such circumstancea

49
Q

Dementia as incapacity

A

Will be analyzed situationally: does the signer have sufficient understanding to know what the document is and the effect of the signing? May depend on time of document.

Evidence of capacity must often be reconstructed after the fact

Will is lowest level capacity

Considerations of capacity vs undue influence

50
Q

In the matter of Agnes D. Rick

A

Investment account manager administering estate of a widow eventually became attorney-in-fact, executor for her will and trustee for her trust

Widow has diminished cognitive abilities from dementia.

Court took testimony from friends, family, and expert witnesses and eventually determined that she had not had the capacity to agree to the various contracts and that account manager had used position for own benefit

Business law (15 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions