written response to problem 6

For the written response to the problem, I would encourage you to try to show that you can identify and explain the legal issue in the problem, tell me (briefly) what the relevant rule is (or factors that a court might consider), and apply the rule to the facts in the problem to arrive at a conclusion. As mentioned in class, I am not looking for the "correct" answer - there may not be a correct answer - but rather an explanation of how you would respond to the problem and then support your answer by referring to relevant legal principles and facts in the problem.

One way to think about this is via the "IRAC" method: Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion - meaning try to identify the legal issue, explain the general rule applicable to the legal issue, analyze the facts in light of the issue and rule, and then reach and support your conclusion based on the foregoing.

For most problems you should be able to answer in a page or less, e.g. I don't need you to restate the facts and I don't need you to copy the textbook - instead I want you to develop comfort with the legal issues and try to reach a conclusion.

6. When Perry Olsen died, his children placed his ranch in Vail, Colorado, up for sale. Perry's children retained Vail Associates Real Estate, a real estate broker, to sell the land for them. Vail Associates introduced the children to Magnus Lindholm, who wanted to buy Per- ry's ranch along with adjacent land owned by Perry's children. The children eventually decided to sell only Perry's ranch and not the children's land. Their ask- ing price for Perry's ranch was $400 per acre. Be- fore committing to buying Perry's ranch (because he needed more land), Lindholm asked Vail Associates to introduce him to Del Rickstrew, whose land also abutted Perry's ranch. Rickstrew refused to negoti ate the sale through a real estate agent, so Lindholm negotiated directly with Rickstrew. Vail Associates did, however, introduce Rickstrew to Lindholm and provide a model contract to Lindholm. A month later, Lindholm agreed to buy Rickstrew's land for$6,000 per acre, subject to his buying Perry's ranch also. Vail Associates was not aware that Lindholm and Rickstrew had a contract or that the price was $6,000 per acre. Two months later, with Vail Associates's assis- tance, the children sold Perry's ranch to Lindholm for $400 per acre. Vail Associates received a commission from the sale. When the children discovered later that Rickstrew received 15 times as much for his acreage as did they for Perry's ranch, they sued Vail Associates for failing to disclose material information-that is, that Lindholm was negotiating with Rickstrew. Did Vail As- sociates breach a fiduciary duty