1- Directions:Please answer the following questions:

(i) What is the difference between a void contract, voidable contract, and a valid contract?

(ii) One of the requirements for a valid contract is "capacity", what does "capacity" mean?

(iii) Should the buyer be allowed to disaffirm the contract? Why or why not?

Please respond to the questions below regarding theFloarscase.

Bobby Floars Toyota, Inc. v. Smith,269 S.E.2d 320 (N.C.App. 1980), A minor purchased and financed a car from a car dealership when they were one month from turning 18. After making a total of 11 monthly payments, the buyer attempted to disaffirm the contract under the theory that this was a minor's contract.

2- Answer the following questions: Based on the requirements to form a bailment, do you think that Ms. Lippert had a valid case? Why or why not? You should first summarize your understanding of what is needed to make a bailment. Please also discuss the type of bailment that could have been created in this case (e.g., was it a mutual benefit bailment) and the facts that support the type of bailment that you think was created.

Delta Case

a.Ms. Lippert made the wildly unusual decision to put $431,000 worth of jewelry in her purse when she attempted to fly from West Palm Beach to New York on a Delta Airlines flight.

b.At the security checkpoint, operated by Wackenhut, her bag was placed on the magnetometer, and while she was going through the security archway, her purse, with the jewelry inside, was stolen.

c.Ms. Lippert sued Delta and Wackenhut for negligence, arguing that a mutual benefit bailment had been created when Wackenhut took possession of her purse.

d.The defendants argued that the limitation of liability clause, appearing on the back of Delta's ticket, made them only liable for $1,250 for loss or damage to a passenger's baggage.

e.They also argued that they were a gratuitous bailee since the security checkpoint was required by federal law, and therefore were only liable for gross negligence.

f.Ms. Lippert argued that the limitation of liability didn't apply to her purse because it hadn't reached the cargo compartment or cabin of the airplane, as described on the back of the ticket. Therefore, it wasn't baggage, according to the ticket's definition.

3- Answer the following questions:

Do you think the assessment of the loss fell on the proper party?Why or why not?

Did the plaintiff act ethically in suing Greyhound and American Locker?

Whose fault was it that the money was stolen?

What would be the impact on coin-operated locker businesses if the jury's verdict were allowed to stand

a.This case concerned an illicit purchase of smuggled gold with a purchase price of $409,000. The money was placed in a suitcase in a coin-operated locker owned and operated by American Locker Co. located in a Greyhound bus station, with the buyer and seller each having a key.

b.The seller's accomplice used fraud to get a Greyhound employee to open the locker and then took the suitcase. When the seller discovered this, he sued Greyhound and American Locker. The jury, ruling for the plaintiff (seller), found that a bailment had been created.

c.The Court of Appeals, however, reversed, concluding that a bailment could not have been created with a coin-operated locker because there was no common law notion of delivery for bailment purposes. The owner of the goods never gives up possession of the property because there is no "bailee" with a coin-operated locker.

4- Directions:

Please respond to the following question(s):Provide two examples of when you or any person you know may have signed a contract while casually surfing the internet.Your response should specify: (I) the name and type of contract that was signed; (ii) why you think the signed document was a contract (e.g., summarize the terms of the contract by referencing the six elements necessary to make a contract); and (iii) provide the link to the contract.

5- Please answer the following questions:

(i) Do you think Carol Publishing and Golub acted unethically in this case?

(ii) What purpose is served by copyright law?

(iii) What is the fair use doctrine and why doesn't this fall under the fair use doctrine?

Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Inc., 150 F.2d 132 (2d Cir. 1998), concerned a copyright infringement case involving the television show Seinfeld. In 1995, Carol Publishing published a book, The Seinfeld Aptitude Test (SAT), written by Beth Golub. The book, naturally designed to take advantage of Seinfeld's popularity, tests the reader's intimate knowledge of the show and its characters by asking 643 questions, in multiple-choice, matching, and short answer questions. Some of the questions involve dialogue from the series. The name "Seinfeld" appears on the front and back of the book. Castle Rock sued Carol Publishing for copyright infringement and won a summary judgment, which was appealed. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that the SAT plainly copies copyrightable and creative expression. Each question is based upon facts from the shows (What was Kramer's first name?), not facts about the show (What late-night television show did Michael Richards appear in the early 1980s?). These facts come from the tangible expression of the creator's imagination and were used without Castle Rock's permission.

6-Corporate Constitutional Rights: Corporations have been granted freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, and due process of law.

Does it make sense that a legal (as opposed to natural) person has these rights?Why or why not?

7- Holley v. Meyer, 258 F.3d 1127 (2003).Holley and Holley, an interracial couple, alleged that they were the victims of discrimination in housing as a result of actions by Crank, anemployeeof Triad, Inc. The Holleys sued Meyer, the sole shareholder, the president, and a broker of Triad, Inc. Meyer argued that he was not personally responsible for the actions of either Triad or its employee, Crank.

Will the Holleys be successful in their efforts to hold Meyer personally responsible? Why or why not?

8- Directions: Please answer the following questions:

(i) should creditors searching financing records be required to search for financing statements filed under the debtor's trade names as well as its legal name?

(ii) Did the bankruptcy trustee act ethically in avoiding the secured creditor's security interest?

(iii) Was the filing of the financing statement under the wrong name an error that could have easily been prevented?

Re Greenbelt Cooperative, Inc., 124 Bankr. 465 (1991)concerned the voidability of a lien placed on forklifts leased to Greenbelt Cooperative, a retail furniture business that did business under the trade name SCAN, a fact well known to consumers. A month after leasing the forklifts to Greenbelt, Raymond Leasing Corp., the lessor filed a financing statement in the correct place and listed "Scan Furniture" as the debtor. Over a year later, Greenbelt filed for bankruptcy, and the bankruptcy trustee moved to avoid Raymond's security interest in the equipment because the legal name of the debtor (Greenbelt) wasn't listed on the financing statement. The bankruptcy court agreed with the trustee, concluding that a financing statement should list the legal name of the debtor or a name substantially similar to the legal name so that it would not mislead a reasonably diligent creditor searching the financing records. A creditor should only be required to search under the legal name of a debtor obtain notice of a security interest or be put on notice to inquire further. Therefore, the court voided Raymond's lien on the equipment.