Contracts Flashcards
What is a unilateral contract?
One promise and a performance
This results from an offer that expressly requires performance as the only possible method of acceptance
Ex. “offer” + “only by”
Once performance begins under a unilateral contract, the offeror cannot cancel the offer. However, mere preparation is not enough for the unilateral K to become irrevocable - performance must have begun.
Doesn’t terminate when offeror dies; as long as you continue performing, you recover.
What is a bilateral contract?
This results from all offers that aren’t unilateral
There will be a bilateral contract unless:
(1) Reward/prize/contest
(2) Offer expressly requires performance for acceptance (unilateral)
What is quasi contract?
An equitable remedy not governed by contract law. Any time the application of contract rules produces an unfair result, consider quasi contract.
Also known as implied-in-law contract. When there is no contractual relationship between the parties, an implied-in-law contract action will prevent unjust enrichment of one party to the detriment of another.
What is the UCC Art. 1
Under Article 1, common law contract applies to sale of goods “unless displaced by particular provisions” of Art. 2
What is the UCC Art. 2 and what does it apply to?
Art. 2 applies to contracts that are primarily for sales of goods. Factors in determining applicability:
(1) type of transaction (sale?) and
(2) subject matter of transaction (goods - tangible/personal property)?
Does NOT apply to: real estate transactions, services contracts, employment contracts, agreements to provide specific services.
How do you determine whether a mixed deal (with services, sale of goods) applies the UCC?
General rule: all or nothing test, based on what the most important part of the deal is.
Exception: if the contract expressly divides payment, then apply UCC to sale of goods and common law to the rest (ex. $10 for yo yo, $39,990 for lessons)
What is the basic definition of a contract?
A contract is an agreement that is legally enforceable. Thus, an agreement must be ENFORCEABLE (valid offer, termination of offer? acceptance)
What is the general test for determining whether an initial communication constitutes an offer?
General test: manifestation of commitment. Would a reasonable person in the position of offeree believe that his or her assent creates a K.
Note: a bid can be an offer.
What if the price term is missing in an offer to sell?
If common law: price and land description required to constitute an offer to sell.
If UCC: can exclude price in offer, so long as it meets test (“intent of parties”)
What if there are vague or ambiguous terms in an offer?
Under UCC/common law alike, vague or ambiguous MATERIAL terms are not an offer (test: appropriate, fair, reasonable)
Ex. sale of car for “fair price” is not an offer under either CL or UCC
What is a requirements or output contract?
When buyer agrees to buy all its things from the seller, OR the seller agrees to sell its whole production to the buyer.
Requirements:
- Can’t be vague/ambiguous
- Can state quantity of goods in terms of either requirement or output (ex. all, only, exclusively, solely)
- Under UCC, price/time need not be spelled out - terms supplied by “reasonableness” standard if otherwise consistent with parties’ intent (but that won’t change the express terms of the K)
Under the UCC, a good faith term is implied (such actual requirements as may occur in good faith)
In a valid requirements contract, both parties’ promises create binding obligations - the promisor binds itself to buy from the supplier all that it requires, and the supplier binds itself to sell to the promisor that same amount. Consideration exists because the promisor is suffering a legal detriment; it has parted with the legal right to buy the goods it may need from another source.
Ex. “as many peaches as it chooses” does not sufficiently bind because it is illusory; “as many peaches as it requires” does. An agreement to bind only what is desired is not consideration.
Can a buyer increase the requirements in a requirements contract?
Yes, so long as the increase is in line with prior demands, and no unreasonably disproportionate increase is allowed.
Test: compare proportionally with the prior demand
Can an advertisement or price quote be an offer?
Generally, ads and price quotes aren’t offers.
Exception:
- Reward is unilateral offer
- Ads can be offer if it specifies quantity and explicitly dictates terms of acceptance (fur coat, first come first serve, $10)
What is offer termination?
Removes the power of acceptance from the offeree; the offer itself no longer exists
What are the four main ways in which someone can terminate an offer?
- Lapse of time
- Death of a party prior to acceptance
- Words or conduct of offeror (offer revocation)
- Words or conduct of offeree
What is required for an offer to be considered terminated due to lapse of time?
Either time stated, or reasonable time elapses.
What is required for an offer to be considered terminated due to death of a party?
General rule: death or incapacity of either party after offer, but before acceptance, terminates.
Exception: irrevocable offer.
What is required for an offer to be considered terminated due to words or conduct of offeror (i.e. revocation)?
An offer can be revoked through either:
- Later unambiguous statement by offeror to offeree of unwillingness or inability to contract, OR
- Later unambiguous conduct by offeror indicating an unwillingness or inability to contract that the offeree is aware of.
Note
- Multiple offer does not constitute a revocation, b/c not unambiguous
Exception: four irrevocable contracts
What are the four irrevocable contracts?
- Option (offer + paid promise)
- UCC Firm Offer Rule (offer + written promise + merchant)
- Reliance (offer + reasonably foreseeable and detrimental reliance)
- Unilateral contract (unilateral K offer + start of performance)
What is an option contract (irrevocable contract, which cannot be terminated by offeror after offer)?
(1) offer
(2) offeror promised not to revoke (or promised to kep offer open) and
(3) promise supported by payment or other consideration (“option”) (common law)
Options are irrevocable both in UCC and common law.
Options may be kept open for however long parties contract to.
Note: mailbox rule does not apply to the exercise of options. Acceptance of an option is effective only when received.
What is the UCC’s “firm offer rule” (irrevocable contract, which cannot be terminated by offeror after offer)?
Offer cannot be revoked for up to three months if:
(1) offer to buy/sell goods
(2) signed, written promise to keep offer open (by its own terms)
(3) offeror is a merchant.
Irrevocable during the time stated. Period of irrevocability may not exceed 90 days (if litigated).
Note: if you see an orally agreed-to option contract from a merchant, firm offer rule will NOT apply and it will not be irrevocable.
A merchant is someone in business
If the promise says that the offer won’t be revoked for longer than three months, the courts don’t punish that overreach they just cap it at 3 months.
What is the irrevocable offer through reliance?
Offer cannot be revoked if there has been reasonably foreseeable and detrimental reliance.
When is an offer in a unilateral contract irrevocable?
Start of performance pursuant to an offer to enter into unilateral contract
Mere preparation will be insufficient (if painting - preparation is everything up to putting the paint on the wall)
When will the words/conduct of offeree create an indirect rejection?
Indirect rejection through
(1) Counteroffer
(2) Conditional acceptance
(3) Additional terms aka Mirror Image Rule [common law only]
What is a counteroffer?
Generally TERMINATES the offer and creates a new offer.
Exception:
- If there is an option (offer + promise + consideration), counteroffer will not kill offer.
Distinguish from bargaining, which doesn’t terminate offer (question mark)
What is a conditional acceptance, and when will it constitute an indirect rejection?
A conditional acceptance always terminates the offer. At CL, it becomes a counteroffer that can be accepted through conduct. In UCC, it’s just a rejection!
Look for response to an offer with the words “accept” followed by “if”/”only if”/”provided”/”so long as”/”but”/”on condition that.
The difference between CL and UCC means that there will be a difference as to which terms are accepted (UCC - conduct will be based solely on conduct, new provision doesn’t enter)
What is the Mirror Image Rule?
UCC expressly rejects, only under common law.
A response to an offer that adds new terms is treated like a counteroffer rather than an acceptance. That means that there is no enforceable contract between the parties, because the additional term constitutes a rejection of the offer and counteroffer.
What happens if there are additional or different terms added to an offer (under UCC Art. 2-207)?
Battle of the forms.
Ask:
- Is there a contract?
- If you add new terms but don’t make them a condition of acceptance, generally treated as “seasonable expression of acceptance” - Is the additional term a part of the K?
- If both parties aren’t merchants, not a part.
- If both parties are merchants, will not be a part if the additional term
(a) is material
(b) the offer expressly limits acceptance to its terms, OR
(c) offeror has already rejected the terms or rejects the terms in reasonable time period
–
Rules
- If the offeree (seller, usually) accepts the offer and at the same time makes a material alteration or adds an additional term to the offer, we have a contract and the terms of the offer control.
- If there is an acceptance with a non-material change, then the change is incorporated into the contract, UNLESS the offeror objects to those changes within a reasonable period of time. If the offeror objects, the changes are out.
- What is a material alteration? A change that substantially affects the economic risks/benefits, or changes the usual remedy for breach of K (liability, $, damages) i.e. arbitration clause.
Who can control the method of acceptance of an offer?
Offeror can control the method. However, usually on bar exam questions the K will be silent as to these details and we will have some complication.
What happens if there is a verbal offer, no response, but start of performance?
Generally: start of performance will be treated as acceptance. Starting to perform treated as an implied promise to perform.
Exception: start of performance is not acceptance of unilateral K offer, only completion of performance is.
What is the mailbox rule, and the rules governing when a communication will constitute acceptance?
This will come up when the offeror and offeree are at different places and there are delays in the receipt of communications. Four rules:
- All communications other than acceptance are effective only when received
- Acceptance is generally effective when mailed (i.e. “mailbox rule”) (exception: accepting an option K)
- If rejection mailed before acceptance mailed, then neither is effective until received.
- You cannot use the mailbox rule to meet an option deadline (ex. mailed at 4:59 Friday when the option gave you until 5 pm to accept)
Note: the mailbox rule does not apply when the offeree sends a rejection, followed by an acceptance. Whichever is received first controls.
What happens when a seller of goods sends the “wrong” goods?
General rule: acceptance and breach.
Exception: accommodation
- Counteroffer and no breach (“out of red, hope you can ues the blue” (this isn’t a contract)
Who can accept an offer, and who cannot?
Only by:
- Person who knows about the offer at the time she accepts, AND
- Who is the person to whom it was made.
Can an option be assigned? Can an offer?
Offers cannot be assigned, and options can be assigned (unless the option otherwise provides)
What are some reasons why an agreement may not be legally enforceable?
- Lack of consideration or consideration substitute for promise
- Lack of capacity of person who made promise
- Statute of Frauds
- Existing law that prohibits performance of agreement
- Public policy
- Misrepresentations
- Nondisclosure
- Duress
- Unconscionability
- Ambiguity in the words of the agreement
- Mistakes at time of agreement re: material facts affecting agreement
What is consideration?
A bargained-for legal detriment. Peppercorn.
Three step issue:
- Identify promise breaker
- Did that person ask for something in return for promise (bargain for something)?
- What legal detriment did the person trying to enforce the agreement suffer?
Legal detriment: doesn’t need to actually be detrimental, needs only deprive you of something you have a legal right to do.
Can one promise ever be consideration for another promise?
Yes (I promise to buy your house, you promise to buy my house).
Exception: “illusory promise exception”
- if you can terminate the K at any time without notice
- Then, the promise cannot create any kind of obligation or detriment. Won’t be illusory if you have the legal right to do soething.
- But the slightest obligation can save you (“I reserve right to terminate at any time upon 10 days notice”)
When can past consideration constitute consideration?
Generally, past consideration (moral obligation) is not consideration. You can’t bargain for something that has already happened. NOR is it a valid consideration substitute.
Exception: expressly requested by promisor AND expectation of payment by promisee
Ex. H sees L in danger, asks A to save her, knowing A will expect to be paid. After A saves L, H promises to pay.
What is the pre-existing contractual or statutory duty rule?
At common law: the general rule is that doing what you are already legally obligated to do is not new consideration for a new promise.
- Exception under modern law: unforeseen difficulty so severe as to excuse performance (creates new detriment)
- Exception: third party promise to pay (if another person gets involved)
Under UCC: no pre-existing legal duty. New consideration is not required to modify a sale of goods.
Test: was the modification in good faith?
When can past payment (i.e. promise to forgive debt balance) constitute consideration?
General rule: key is whether debt is due and disputed. If due and undisputed, no consideration (b/c no new detriment).
What are some consideration substitutes?
- Written promise to satisfy an obligation (for which there is a legal defense i.e. past SOL but you agree to pay anyways)
- Promissory estoppel (detrimental, foreseeable, reasonable reliance)
- A seal, if the state recognizes it as a consideration substitute.
Who lacks capacity to contract?
Who lacks:
- Infant (under 18 - no matter how old the other party thinks you are)
- Mental incompetent (can’t understand agreement) or
- Intoxicated person if the other party has reason to know they are intoxicated
What are the consequences of incapacity?
- Right to disaffirm by person without capacity
- Implied affirmation (ratification) by retaining benefits after gaining capacity (once you regain capacity you impliedly affirm if you retain the benefits after)
- Quasi-contract liability for necessities by incompetent person (food, clothing, medical care, shelter)
What proof is required to satisfy SoF?
Performance or a writing signed by defendant
Signed could be on letterhead.
What is suretyship, and when does SoF apply?
Surety contract is a promise to answer for the debt for another if they do not pay. SoF applies to suretyship.
Ex. parents co-signing a loan for you (must be in writing).
Main Purpose Exception: if the main purpose of the guarantor in making the surety promise was to benefit herself, then the promise need not be in writing. SOF does not apply.
When will service contracts be subject to the Statute of Frauds?
SoF will apply if the service contract is not capable of being performed within a year from the time of the contract (i.e. more than a year).
“Capable” means theoretically possible with truly unlimited resources
Ex. 3-year employment contract, termination possible with 30 days notice (SoF applies
Ex. Specific time period, more than a year from date of contract
Ex. task that says nothing about time - SOF doesn’t apply
Ex. task “for the rest of X’s life” - SoF doesn’t apply, because could possibly be completed within a year.
When will a transfer of interest in real estate be subject to the Statute of Frauds?
Transfers of interest in real estate are generally subject to SoF.
Note: must be transfer but doesn’t need to be title (can be lesser interest, like easement).
Exception: leases 1 year or less in duration
When will the sale of goods be subject to the Statute of Frauds?
When the sale of goods is for $500 or more.
Written confirmation, 10-day rule exception to SOF. If both parties merchants and enter into oral agreement, a subsequent written confirmation of the oral agreement is enforceable immediately against the sender. The recipient is bound, if they don’t object to the confirmation within 10 days of receipt.
Note: An oral K for goods is enforceable to the extent of goods received and accepted by buyer.
When will performance satisfy the Statute of Frauds requirement within real estate?
Part performance satisfies SoF in transfers of real estate. Part performance requires two of the three:
- Improvements to land
- Payment
- Possession
When will performance satisfy the Statute of Frauds requirement within a services contract?
Full performance by either party satisfies the Statute of Frauds requirements.
Part performance of a services contract will not satisfy the Statute of Frauds.
Note: using marriage as consideration requires WRITTEN K.
When will performance satisfy the Statute of Frauds requirement within a sale of goods contract?
Seller’s part performance of a K for the sale of goods satisfies SoF, but only to the extent of the part performance
For ordinary goods: need something to be delivered that person is suing over.
For custom/specially manufactured goods, SoF is satisfied as soon as seller makes a “substantial beginning” (done enough work that it’s clear that what she is working on is specially manufactured)
When will a writing satisfy the Statute of Frauds (in all aspects aside from Article 2 sale of goods)?
- all material terms test [who - both parties - and what]??
2. signed by defendant?
When will a writing satisfy the Statute of Frauds in Article 2 UCC?
- Indicate that there is K for sale of goods
- Contain quantity term (how many)
- Generally must be signed by defendant (limited exception for transactions between two merchants with delay in responding)
What effect does a judicial admission re: existence of an agreement have on the Statute of Frauds requirement?
If the defendant asserting an SoF defense admits in pleading or other testimony that he entered into an agreement with P (“we agreed but never put it in writing”), then the purpose of SoF (protection against fraudulent claims of agreement) are fulfilled and SoF is satisfied.
What happens if the plaintiff relied upon the defendant’s oral promise in writing, but then D asserts Statute of Frauds issue?
Some cases hold that estoppel will keep defendant from raising an SoF defense.
When does proof of authorization for a third party to enter into contract on someone else’s behalf need to be in writing (to satisfy Statute of Frauds)?
Rule of law is that the authorization must be in writing only if the contract to be signed falls within the Statute of Frauds (authorization must only be of “equal dignity” with K)
When is written proof of a contract modification required?
If the deal with the alleged change would be within SoF, then the alleged modification must be in writing.
Ex. T leases building for 3 years. T claims they agreed to reduce from 3 years to 1. K law does not require written evidence of the alleged mod.
However, a modification need not be in writing. Sometimes, a written contract may be modified orally.
What is the effect of a contract provision requiring that all modifications be in writing?
Common law: ineffective, ignore this provision
UCC: effective unless waived
What effect will illegality have on enforcement of a contract?
If the subject matter is illegal, agreement is not enforceable.
If the subject matter is legal, the agreement is enforceable if the P did not have reason to know of D’s illegal purpose.
What effect will public policy considerations have on a court’s willingness to void an agreement?
Courts can refuse to enforce an agreement due to bad public policy. Look for:
- Exculpatory agreement (seeks to limit liability) that exempts intentional/reckless conduct from liability, OR
- Covenant not to compete without a reasonable need/time/place limits.
What effect does misrepresentation have on a court’s willingness to enforce an agreement?
Remedy: rescind.
- Statement of “fact” before the contract
- By one of the contracting parties or agent
- That is false
- Fraudulent or material
- Induces the contract
No wrongdoing required for material misrepresentations, must be relied upon or induced.
What effect does duress or undue influence have on a court’s willingness to enforce a contract?
- Physical duress
- Economic duress (bad guy who usually imposed an improper threat, and vulnerable guy with no reasonable alternative).
If undue influence, look for (1) special relationship between parties, and (2) improper persuasion of weaker by stronger
What effect does unconscionability have on a court’s willingness to enforce a K?
Never goes to the jury, is a question of law. Two basic tests:
- Unfair surprise (procedural)
- Oppressive terms (substantive)
The terms have to be so one-sided it shocks the conscience, unequal bargaining terms. Must be held over a barrel.
Tested as of the time the agreement was made by the court.
What effect does ambiguity of a contract term have on a court’s willingness enforce a K?
No K if (1) parties use a material term that is open to at least 2 reasonable interpretations, (2) parties attach different meanings to those terms, (3) neither party knows or has reason to know the term is open to at least 2 reasonable interpretations.
What effect does mistake of fact have on a court’s willingness to enforce a K?
- Mutual, material mistake of existing fact (at time of contract) - both parties are mistaken (not just uncertain) about an existing fact, and person seeking relief does not bear the risk of mistake. Mutual mistake can result in rescission.
- Unilateral mistake of fact (only one party mistake). - generally will not prevent contract formation. generally, courts more reluctant to allow party to avoid a contract for mistake made only by one party. There will be relief, however, for situations in which other party knew or had REASON to know of mistake (palpable mistake). They aren’t permitted to snap up the benefit of the bargain.
- Ex. Bids ranging 5k-6k, lowest bid 3k - homeowner should have known or asked questions. Can’t enforce.
- Bidder USUALLY assumes the risk, outside of this exception.
Note: Mistake is only a defense to formation of a contract, and is said to render a contract voidable by the adversely affected party. Thus, mistake is NOT a ground on which relief can be granted.
What is integration, for purposes of the parol evidence rule?
The written agreement that the court finds to be the final agreement (which then triggers the parol evidence rule).
When the parties to a contract express their agreement in writing, with the intent that the writing embody the final expression of their bargain, no other expression made prior to or during the the writing is admissible to vary the terms of the writing.
What is partial integration?
A written, final document that isn’t complete (like a really short agreement, that is meant to be final as to what it covers)
Its opposite: complete integration
What is a merger clause?
Contract clause such as “this is the complete and final agreement” - persuasive but not conclusive
What is parol evidence that may be admissible?
Rule: Limited to the words of the party (or parties) before integration (before the agreement is put in written form), oral or written. Any oral expressions made contemporaneously with the agreement will be deemed inadmissible. Does not apply for modifications (won’t bar evidence).
Admissible: supplementing consistent terms (see below); facts that don’t actually go to a material term of the contract
What the rule re: parol evidence if there are changing or contradictory terms within a written deal?
Evidence of earlier agreements cannot be considered for the purpose of contradicting the terms in the written contract
When is parol evidence admissible if there is a mistake in integration, i.e. clerical mistake?
You can consider parol evidence of these terms for the limited purpose of determining whether there was a mistake in integration (i.e. mistake in reducing agreement to writing).