Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Contract law short case study
Contract law short case study
Contract law case study
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Contract law short case study
Jordan Williams Professor David Persky CRM 123 Case Brief 1 Title and Citation: Suggs v. Norris 364 S.E.2d 159 (1988) Type of Action: Suggs sued the estate of Norris over compensation for work to maintain decedents produce business. Defendant appealed the verdict in favor of plaintiff saying that their implied contracts were invalid. Facts of the Case: Darleen Suggs started working and helped maintain the produce business with the decedent, Junior Earl Norris, from 1973 until his death in 1983. During this time and according to several witnesses, the plaintiff did most of the farm work, as well as drive to markets 60 miles away, without aid of the decedent. She also handled all finances and deposited them into their joint bank account, giving her the reason to believe they had an implied contract that she was a partner and would receive one-half of the profits. In …show more content…
Norris- the plaintiff had worked decedent's farm, worked the soil, and harvested and marketed the produce. Plaintiff, working primarily without the decedent's aid, and drove the produce to various markets. She handled all finances and deposited them in the couple's joint banking account. Finally, the evidence showed that the decedent, an alcoholic, depended almost entirely on plaintiff's work in the produce business and as well her care of him while he was ill. Issue: Whether public policy forbids the recovery by a plaintiff partner to an unmarried but cohabitating or relationship, from the other partners estate, for services rendered to or benefits conferred upon the other partner through the plaintiffs work in the operation of a joint business when the business proceeds were utilized to enrich the estate of the diseased
4. Facts: It was the time of August in 1986, when William Geringer with his family was on vacation at the Wildhorn Ranch Resort located in Teller County, Colorado. Due to some defective Paddleboating boat two of the family members (William Geringer and his minor son Jared Geringer) were drowned. Mr. Watters, a defendant, was formerly the owner of the resort, but he stated that he handed over the possession to Wildhorn Ranch Inc. “The other defendant, Les Bretzke, was a contractor with an autonomous company that endow with repair services and repair construction to the resort.” During the whole trial the main focus was on the maintainability issues of
III. Issue. The issue is whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the employer appellee on the employee appellant’s sexual harassment claim, and whether the court was right in excluding evidence regarding the sexual
1. As the person, responsible for labor relations at Barrera Recycling Company, articulate a case to support your contention that there was just cause for the discharge of Erin McNamara.
Alfalfa, a novice rock climber, decided to go on a very difficult climb. Half way up, he found himself in trouble. Darla, a more experienced climber, at great peril to herself, rescued Alfalfa from almost certain serious injury, if not death. Alfalfa was so grateful for what Darla had done that he promised to send her a check for $1,000. Alfalfa failed to send the check and Darla sues him for breach of contract. Judgment for whom? Explain.
Third-Party Defendant, Delta-T Corporation, (“Delta-T”), by its attorneys, ADLER MURPHY & McQUILLEN LLP, moves this Honorable Court for an order allowing Third-Party Plaintiff, Agra Industries, Inc. (“Agra”) to produce the Settlement Agreement between Agra and Plaintiff, United Ethanol, LLC (“United Ethanol”), and for an extension of time for Delta-T to respond to Agra’s Motion to Participate on Its Own Right To Recover Damages against Delta-T.
The conclusion of the court in their summary judgment was that no “genuine issue of material fact” was present to establish “a claim of an agency relationship.” In fact, masslawyersweekly.com reports the court went on to say, “If the evidence had failed to materialize upon any one of those elements, the deficiency would be fatal to the lawsuit. The evidence appears to have failed to materialize upon all three of the elements.” Thus, in this case, none of the prongs of the test was met to indicate agency. (Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly,
What uncompensated work did the plaintiff claim she performed? What should the district court have done with the statement of another employee that the plaintiff did not engage in work prior to her official start time?
The trial court of Florida had found that the prior will (executed in 2007) on which the Agees based their standing was invalid as opposing to public policy because Mr. Agee, had drafted that earlier will at the time he was the decedent’s attorney in which he and his wife were left a substantial inheritance. Brown argued that the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar was violated by Mr. Agee because he is not
M. Pawlowski, 'Imputed intention and joint ownership - a return to common sense: Jones v Kernott (Case Comment)' [2012] CPL 149, 158
To put the house out of reach of Jones, he bought a company "off the shelf" and conveyed the house to it. In an action against Lipman and the company, the court granted the specific performance and ruled that "the defendant company is the creature of the first defendant, a device and ...
McLaughlin v. Heikkila is a case that involves Wilbert Heikklia and David Mc Laughlin who entered into an agreement involving eight parcels to be sold to Mr. Mc Laughlin by Mr. Heikklia. According to Cheeseman (2013), the facts of the case indicate that Mr. Mc Laughlin submitted offers to Mr. Heikklia for the purchase of three parcels and afterwards, McLaughlin submitted earnest-money checks and three printed purchase agreements to Heikklia. According to the Minnesota Court of Appeals, McLaughlin himself never signed any of the agreements. However, his wife did sign two of the agreements and she initiated the third agreement on September 14, 2003. Then, two days later on September 16, 2003 Heikklia made changes to two of the agreements by increasing the cost of the parcels, and he changed the closing dates on all three agreements, including add a reservation of mineral rights to all three (Minnesota Court of Appeals, 2005).
In the film, A Civil Action, Trial Procedure was shown throughout the entire movie. There are many steps that need to be completed before a verdict and judgment can be reached. These steps are the pleadings, methods of discovery, pretrial hearings, jury selection, opening statements, introduction of evidence, cross examinations, closing arguments, instructions to the jury, and the verdict and judgment. The case in this movie was actually called Anderson v. Cryovac. The plaintiffs are the Anderson family, the Gamache family, the Kane family, the Robbins family, the Toomey family, and the Zona family. The plaintiffs’ attorneys are Jan Schlichtmann, Joe Mulligan, Anthony Roisman, Charlie Nesson, and Kevin Conway. The two co- defendants are W.R. Grace and Beatrice Foods. The two co-defendants’ attorneys are William Cheeseman, Jerome Facher, Neil Jacobs, and Michael Keating.
The case had to do with Mr. Jacob Wood. He died in his early fifties from lung cancer. The plaintiff was trying to prove that the lung cancer was directly caused f...
Chapter 19. p413. John G.Fleming [4] P419. Textbook on Torts 8th edition. Michael A.Jones [5] Vicarious Liability for Employers. Andrew Scott-Howman.