Please use IRAC methods

Issue,

Rule( has been provided already),

Analysis,

Conclusion).....

1.Duress.In2005,SalserGraniteCo.hiredDarrylLeibergerunderanemploymentcontractthatstatedhewasentitledtosixmonths'severancepayifhewaslaidoff.Thecompanywouldnothavetopayintheeventofanyvoluntaryseparationorinvoluntaryterminationforotherreasons,suchasforpoorperformanceorforcause.Inmid2006,LeibergerwasaskedtoresignafterhavinganaffairwiththeCEO'sexecutivesecretary.Leibergerwastoldthatifhedidnotresign,hewouldbefiredforviolatingcompanypolicies,butthatifhedidresignthecompanywouldkeephimonthepayrollforanothersixweeks.LeibergerresignedandsignedanagreementreleasingSalserGranitefromanyliabilityforbreachoftheemploymentcontract.LeibergerlaterclaimedthathehadsignedthereleaseunderduressandsuedSalserGraniteforthesixmonths'severancepayunderhisemploymentcontract.DiscusswhetherLeiberger'sclaimforduressshouldsucceed.

The rule:

To establish duress, there must be proof of a threat to do something that the threatening party has no right to do. Generally, for duress to occur, the threatened act must be wrongful or illegal, and it must render the person who receives the threat incapable of exercising free will. A threat to exercise a legal right, such as the right to sue someone, ordinarily does not constitute duress.

2. Fraudulent Misrepresentation. Youser Yu was violently assaulted and robbed in the parking structure of his apartment complex after stepping out of his car one night. The perpetrators were not tenants of the complex. They were third parties who were not connected to any tenants. He later learned from the police that they were frequently called to the premises by other tenants for suspicious activities and noise disturbances. But no arrests were ever made by the police. Yu had been living in the apartment for almost a year and did not notice any trouble before this incident occurred. He sued the landlord and the property management company for inducing him to enter into a 2year lease based on false statements made by the manager that the apartment complex was safe and crime free. Yu previously lived in a crime ridden neighborhood and wanted to move into another safe place. He claimed that had it not been for manager's representation regarding the safety of the premises, he would not have signed the 2year lease. The defendants claimed the manager's statements were opinion and not fact. They also argued that the crimes (assault and robbery) were done by third parties whom they had no control over. Would Yu succeed in his claim for fraudulent misrepresentation against defendants?

The rule: Generally, fraudulent misrepresentation refers only to misrepresentation that is consciously false and is intended to mislead another. That is, the person making a fraudulent misrepresentation knows or believes that the assertion is false or knows that there is no basis (stated or implied) for the assertion

Typically, fraud involves the following elements:

1. A misrepresentation of a material fact must occur.

2. There must be an intent to deceive.

3. The innocent party must justifiably rely on the misrepresentation.

4. To collect damages, a party must have been harmed as a result of the misrepresentation.

3. Statute of Frauds. Mila Chen orally contracted with Park Construction, Inc. to completely remodel her 1800 sq ft home. She wanted to turn her 1920s craftsman bungalow into a modern house with a new kitchen, bathroom, flooring, siding, roof and more. Chen told Jin Park, owner of Park Construction, that she did not expect the remodeling project to complete within a year. Park explained to Chen that he could easily finish the remodeling in a few months if she could afford it. Chen stated that she did not think her finances would allow for completion within a year, although she preferred to have it completed sooner than later. They agreed that Park Construction would work on one part of the house at a time until the entire house was finished and that time was not of the essence. The construction was scheduled to start a month after they entered into the oral contract. Park Construction never showed up to the job site on the scheduled start date. It turned out that Park Construction recently contracted with a residential developer to tear down old apartments and build new condos in their place. Chen sued Park Construction for breach of contract. Park Construction claimed they did not have a contract and, if they did, the contract was unenforceable. Is Park Construction correct?

The rule:

The test for determining whether an oral contract is enforceable under the one-year rule is whether performance is possible within one year from the day after the date of contract formation. It does not matter whether the agreement is likely to be performed during that period.

When performance of a contract is objectively impossible during the one-year period, the contract must be in writing to be enforceable.

The following types of contracts are said to fall "within" or "under" the Statute of Frauds and therefore require a writing:

1. Contracts involving interests in land.

2. Contracts that cannot by their terms be performed within one year from the day after the date of formation.

3. Collateral, or secondary, contracts, such as promises to answer for the debt or duty of another.

4. Promises made in consideration of marriage.

5. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, contracts for the sale of goods priced at $500 or more.

..

4. Statute of Frauds. The plaintiff, Palank, formed an oral agreement with the defendant, Dowser, to buy several pounds of rare mushrooms worth over $2,000. Afterward, Dowser wrote a memorandum concerning the agreement and all its terms for his own records and put it in his safe. The memo, which Dowser did not sign, was created on Dowser's letterhead (which is a sufficient signing in the eyes of the court) and contained Palank's name in the text. Subsequently, Dowser wrote a letter to Palank stating he was not going to sell Palank the mushrooms as agreed. When Palank sued Dowser in a Maryland state court for breach of contract, Dowser used the Statute of Frauds as a defense. Palank claimed that Dowser's memo (even if it was never delivered to Palank), combined with the subsequent letter, satisfied the writing requirement of the Statute of Frauds. Is Palank correct? Does the memo written by Dowser satisfy the writing requirement under the Statute of Frauds? Discuss.

The rule:

Another defense to the enforceability of a contract is formspecifically, some contracts must be in writing. All states require certain types of contracts to be in writing or evidenced by a written memorandum or an electronic record. In addition, the party or parties against whom enforcement is sought must have signed the contract, unless certain exceptions apply (as discussed later in this chapter). In this text, we refer to these state statutes collectively as the Statute of Frauds.

The following types of contracts are said to fall "within" or "under" the Statute of Frauds and therefore require a writing:

1. Contracts involving interests in land.

2. Contracts that cannot by their terms be performed within one year from the day after the date of formation.

3. Collateral, or secondary, contracts, such as promises to answer for the debt or duty of another.

4. Promises made in consideration of marriage.

5. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, contracts for the sale of goods priced at $500 or more.

5. Parol Evidence. A 1965 bargaining agreement between employees and Charter Corp. clearly stated that the company would pay the cost of health insurance for employees who had retired prior to 1959. Later bargaining agreements, the last of which expired in 1988 when the plant at which the employees worked was closed, also indicated that once employees reach the age of sixtyfive, Charter would pay for their health insurance and that when they die, their spouses would continue to receive supplemental health benefits at the company's cost. Charter withdrew the health benefits of retired employees in 1988, when it closed its plant and the last agreement expired. Mitt Cole and other retired employees sued the company to have their health benefits reinstated. The employees asserted that the agreements meant that they would be granted benefits for life. Charter contended that the agreements granted benefits only for yearsduring the duration of the agreements. The court was left to decide whether extrinsic evidence (including letters from the company to retirees indicating that the company would pay the cost of the health insurance throughout the retirees' lives) was admissible to clarify terms of the contract. Discuss whether the court should allow the employees to introduce extrinsic evidence to justify their claim?

The rule:

Because of the rigidity of the parol evidence rule, courts make several exceptions. These exceptions include the following:

1. Contracts subsequently modified. Evidence of a subsequent modification (oral or written) of a written contract can be introduced in court. Oral modifications may not be enforceable, however, if they come under the Statute of Frauds (such as a modification that increases the price of the goods being sold to more than $500). Also, oral modifications will not be enforceable if the original contract provides that any modification must be in writing.*

2. Voidable or void contracts. Oral evidence can be introduced in all cases to show that the contract was voidable or void (for instance, induced by mistake, fraud, or misrepresentation). The reason is simple: if deception led one of the parties to agree to the terms of a written contract, oral evidence indicating fraud should not be excluded. Courts frown on bad faith and are quick to allow the introduction at trial of parol evidence when it establishes fraud.

3. Contracts containing ambiguous terms. When the terms of a written contract are ambiguous, evidence is admissible to show the meaning of the terms.

4. Incomplete contracts. Evidence is admissible when the written contract is incomplete in that it lacks one or more of the essential terms. The courts allow evidence to "fill in the gaps" in the contract.

5. Prior dealing, course of performance, or usage of trade. Under the UCC, evidence can be introduced to explain or supplement a written contract by showing a prior dealing, course of performance, or usage of trade.* This is because when buyers and sellers deal with each other over extended periods of time, certain customary practices develop. These practices are often overlooked in the writing of the contract, so courts allow the introduction of evidence to show how the parties have acted in the past. Usage of tradepractices and customs generally followed in a particular industrycan also shed light on the meaning of certain contract provisions, and thus evidence of trade usage may be admissible.

6. Contracts subject to an orally agreed-on condition precedent. Sometimes the parties agree that a condition must be fulfilled before a party is required to perform the contract. This is called a condition precedent. If the parties have orally agreed on a condition precedent and the condition does not conflict with the terms of a written agreement, then a court may allow parol evidence to prove the oral condition. The parol evidence rule does not apply here because the existence of the entire written contract is subject to an orally agreed-on condition. Proof of the condition does not alter or modify the written terms but affects the enforceability of the written contract.

7. Contracts with an obvious or gross clerical (or typographic) error. When an obvious or gross clerical (or typographic) error exists that clearly would not represent the agreement of the parties, parol evidence is admissible to correct the error..