Buisness Law Homework Contract

IMPLIED CONTRACT: APPLYING PRECEDENT Learning Objective: This Assignment has two purposes. The first is to learn the law of Implied/Quasi Contract. The second is to practice Applying Precedent. The Legal Question: Impliediouasi contracts are created by lew when there is no express contract (no written or verbal agreement), but the parties" behavior is sufficient for an objective reasonable person to think there was a contract and it would be inequitable (unfair) for one party to receive that product or service without paying. When you look at Examples 11.6 and 11.9 in your textbook, you will see that these central concepts apply, Assignment FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, USE THE 4-PART RULE FROM THE SEAWEST CASE, BELOW. If you use the Textbook Definition, or Google, you will receive a Zero Grade on this Assignment. PART ONE: Read these portions of the Seawest v. Copenhaver, NO. 65577-9-1, (Wash. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2012) case. FACTS The main facts are undisputed. The Copenhavers own property in Washington State, but outside of a Development wherein Seawest maintains and operates a domestic water & distribution system. The Copenhavers paid Seawest for water services and related assessments until 2001, when they had a dispute with Seawest and stopped paying. Seawest sued for payment and since there were no 1) P a ge facts in dispute, they filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. The Copenhaver defended themselves by claiming that they did not have an express contract. The trial court granted summary judgment in Seawest's favor and the Copenhavers appealed. tacts in dispule, they fied a Motion for Summary dudgmerk. The Cocereaver defended thenselves by claiming that they did not have an express contrad. The thal court granted ummary judgnent in Seawesru favor and the Coperhaven appeakd IN THE WORDS OF THE APPELLATE COURT: The law of Quasi or mplied portract add esses the hasue of Unjent Enichment. To eatablish an impled Contract, the fide requires there to be Undispuled evidence shows tat the Copenhavers unlized fie Seseest system and paid, wthout objection, for all water use water mairbenance, and assessment base charges to Seawest. The Copentaven received quariefy walter bils that show tharges for "walter base," "wash usage," and "atsenamert bane" The Copechwers knewe they were necoiving the waler and contrued using if withoul paying We condude that the undapufed recond supports a contract inpled in law. The Capentaven would to ursusty enthed al the expense of Seawest a they were alowed to reain the benefis of the waler system without payirg tor in. The recort supports a contract impled in 19=. ANSWER THESE THREE QUESTIONS: 1. What woal defonse (excuse) did the Coperhavers have for not payerg ther wate bil? exists (there are 4) 21=11+ 3. For tach of the requiements, stabe a fact from the Seaneat case hat applies to the fuim and susporss the Couf of Appeafs conclusion that there is a cortact impled in tacts) PART TMO: You are now the Judge in the Theodore 8 Franinin ws Kindoodie case. Read these facts: Facts: Thoodore s Franibin developed Crazy Cat, a carcature of a Calco Car =m a "do-notback-down' antude. They promoted and marketed the characier to KiDocde, a popular sepplat of car tood and cal produch. Kiling, A markeing 3. For each of the requirements, state a fact from the Seawest case that applies to the rule and supports the Court of Appeal's conclusion that there is a contract implied in Law between the Copenhavers and Seawest. (NOTE, there will be some repetition of facts.) PART TWO: You are now the Judge in the Theodore \& Franklin vs Kitdoodle case. Read these facts: Facts: Theodore \& Franklin developed Crazy Cat, a caricature of a Calico Cat with a "do-not-back-down" attitude. They promoted and marketed the character to KitDoodle, a popular supplier of cat food and cat products. KSpling, a marketing manager at KitDoodle, liked the idea. He presented it to the CFO falong with financial terms) who rejected it. Soon thereatter, the CFO approached the advertising agency KitDoodle usually works with and presented a "new idea" involving a Crazy Calico Cat. The company made the Cat the focus of its marketing, which was very successful. Nothing was paid to Theodore 8 Franklin. Theodore \& Franklin sued KinDoode for, among other things Breach of limplied Contract. \{NOTE: although Theodore \& Franklin likely have a claim for violation of Intellectual Property, this is a lesson in Contract Law, so focus on that? ANSWER THESE THREE QUESTIONS: 4. Do Theodore \& Franklin have an express contract with Kidoode? Explain. 5. Using the rule from the Seawest case, state a corresponding fact from the Kitdoodle Case to help you decide whether or not there is an impliedlquasi contract between Theodore \& Franklin and Kitdoodle. You should list 4 facts, one for each part of the rule. 6. What is your conciusion? Is there an impliedlquasi contract behween Theodore 8 Franklin and Kadoodle? Explain. IMPLIED CONTRACT: APPLYING PRECEDENT Learning Objective: This Assignment has two purposes. The first is to learn the law of Implied/Quasi Contract. The second is to practice Applying Precedent. The Legal Question: Impliediouasi contracts are created by lew when there is no express contract (no written or verbal agreement), but the parties" behavior is sufficient for an objective reasonable person to think there was a contract and it would be inequitable (unfair) for one party to receive that product or service without paying. When you look at Examples 11.6 and 11.9 in your textbook, you will see that these central concepts apply, Assignment FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, USE THE 4-PART RULE FROM THE SEAWEST CASE, BELOW. If you use the Textbook Definition, or Google, you will receive a Zero Grade on this Assignment. PART ONE: Read these portions of the Seawest v. Copenhaver, NO. 65577-9-1, (Wash. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2012) case. FACTS The main facts are undisputed. The Copenhavers own property in Washington State, but outside of a Development wherein Seawest maintains and operates a domestic water & distribution system. The Copenhavers paid Seawest for water services and related assessments until 2001, when they had a dispute with Seawest and stopped paying. Seawest sued for payment and since there were no 1) P a ge facts in dispute, they filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. The Copenhaver defended themselves by claiming that they did not have an express contract. The trial court granted summary judgment in Seawest's favor and the Copenhavers appealed. tacts in dispule, they fied a Motion for Summary dudgmerk. The Cocereaver defended thenselves by claiming that they did not have an express contrad. The thal court granted ummary judgnent in Seawesru favor and the Coperhaven appeakd IN THE WORDS OF THE APPELLATE COURT: The law of Quasi or mplied portract add esses the hasue of Unjent Enichment. To eatablish an impled Contract, the fide requires there to be Undispuled evidence shows tat the Copenhavers unlized fie Seseest system and paid, wthout objection, for all water use water mairbenance, and assessment base charges to Seawest. The Copentaven received quariefy walter bils that show tharges for "walter base," "wash usage," and "atsenamert bane" The Copechwers knewe they were necoiving the waler and contrued using if withoul paying We condude that the undapufed recond supports a contract inpled in law. The Capentaven would to ursusty enthed al the expense of Seawest a they were alowed to reain the benefis of the waler system without payirg tor in. The recort supports a contract impled in 19=. ANSWER THESE THREE QUESTIONS: 1. What woal defonse (excuse) did the Coperhavers have for not payerg ther wate bil? exists (there are 4) 21=11+ 3. For tach of the requiements, stabe a fact from the Seaneat case hat applies to the fuim and susporss the Couf of Appeafs conclusion that there is a cortact impled in tacts) PART TMO: You are now the Judge in the Theodore 8 Franinin ws Kindoodie case. Read these facts: Facts: Thoodore s Franibin developed Crazy Cat, a carcature of a Calco Car =m a "do-notback-down' antude. They promoted and marketed the characier to KiDocde, a popular sepplat of car tood and cal produch. Kiling, A markeing 3. For each of the requirements, state a fact from the Seawest case that applies to the rule and supports the Court of Appeal's conclusion that there is a contract implied in Law between the Copenhavers and Seawest. (NOTE, there will be some repetition of facts.) PART TWO: You are now the Judge in the Theodore \& Franklin vs Kitdoodle case. Read these facts: Facts: Theodore \& Franklin developed Crazy Cat, a caricature of a Calico Cat with a "do-not-back-down" attitude. They promoted and marketed the character to KitDoodle, a popular supplier of cat food and cat products. KSpling, a marketing manager at KitDoodle, liked the idea. He presented it to the CFO falong with financial terms) who rejected it. Soon thereatter, the CFO approached the advertising agency KitDoodle usually works with and presented a "new idea" involving a Crazy Calico Cat. The company made the Cat the focus of its marketing, which was very successful. Nothing was paid to Theodore 8 Franklin. Theodore \& Franklin sued KinDoode for, among other things Breach of limplied Contract. \{NOTE: although Theodore \& Franklin likely have a claim for violation of Intellectual Property, this is a lesson in Contract Law, so focus on that? ANSWER THESE THREE QUESTIONS: 4. Do Theodore \& Franklin have an express contract with Kidoode? Explain. 5. Using the rule from the Seawest case, state a corresponding fact from the Kitdoodle Case to help you decide whether or not there is an impliedlquasi contract between Theodore \& Franklin and Kitdoodle. You should list 4 facts, one for each part of the rule. 6. What is your conciusion? Is there an impliedlquasi contract behween Theodore 8 Franklin and Kadoodle? Explain