[Contracts]
J1. Gameco, Inc. ("Gameco") manufactures several varieties of consumer video games. It traditionally sells these games only to wholesalers. In 1998, Gameco and Wholesale Games ("Wholesale") executed Gameco's standard form agreement for the sale and purchase of Gameco's video games. The agreement provides that Gameco "agrees to sell and Wholesale agrees to buy Gameco video games for distribution to retail businesses in California. Numerous terms in the agreement relate to the methods of shipment, payment and the manner in which Wholesale conducts its business in the sale of Gameco's games.
There is no formula in the agreement for determining the minimum or maximum number of games that Gameco is obligated to sell, or Wholesale is obligated to buy, nor is there a period fixed for the duration of the agreement. One paragraph states, however: "This agreement may be terminated at the will of either party by written notice to the other party given by registered mail. Such termination shall also operate to cancel all orders received but not shipped by Gameco."
Since the execution of the agreement every order of Wholesale has been shipped by Gameco, and Wholesale has promptly paid every invoice submitted by Gameco. In June of 2001, Wholesale learned that Gameco plans to enter into an arrangement with Tryco. Tryco, a major retailer of video games, was Wholesale's primary video game customer in California during 1999 and 2000.
Gameco acknowledged to Wholesale that Gameco is planning to enter into an arrangement with Tryco. Wholesale's representative stated to Gameco's representative, "How can you do this? You told me before I signed your agreement that you would never sell video games to one of our customers during the life of our agreement." Gameco' s representative responded only that competitive factors require it to begin selling directly to retailers. The next day Wholesale received a registered letter from Gameco canceling their agreement.
1. Does Wholesale have an enforceable contract with Gameco? Discuss.
2. Assuming that an enforceable agreement exists, what rights, if any. does Wholesale have against Gameco and what defenses, if any, may Gameco assert? Discuss.
[Criminal Law]
J2. Ann dressed herself in the uniform of a Club Ritz valet parking attendant and walked to Club Ritz. When none of the Club Ritz attendants were in sight, she approached a luxury car pulling up at the curb and cheerfully said, "May I take your car?" Harvey, the car's owner, nodded, left the engine running, and went inside. Ann drove off in Harvey's car to pick up her friends Tom and Beth for a planned cross-country trip. They expressed admiration and surprise about her "new car," but when Ann told them what happened, Tom warned that the license plates would give them away. He affixed license plates from an abandoned car found around the corner, and the three began their trip. When they arrived at a highway rest stop two hours later, they opened the trunk. Inside was a large basket loaded with fine china and the fixings for a gourmet picnic. The trio congratulated themselves on their good fortune and started to feast. Beth, who was very hungry, consumed the entire contents of a large vacuum bottle of soup. Shortly thereafter, Beth died. The coroner subsequently determined that the vacuum bottle had contained a poison that killed her.
When questioned by police, Harvey stated that he and his wife had been arguing, and that he had prepared the soup with the thought of injuring her. However, he asserted that during a later conversation at the club, he and Dawn had settled their differences and were preparing to leave together when he discovered his car was missing. Dawn and others confirmed the reconciliation.
Based on these facts,
1. Is Harvey guilty of murder of Beth and attempted murder of Dawn or any lesser included offenses? Discuss.
2. Is Ann guilty of theft of Harvey's car? Discuss.
3. Is Tom guilty of any offenses? Discuss.
[Torts]
J3. Henry drove to Bakery and parked in front of the shop. He ordered a vanilla frosted doughnut, indicating that he would eat it at once. The server wrapped the doughnut in a piece of wax paper and handed it to Henry. Each piece of wax paper, manufactured especially for this purpose, bears the printed words "NOT EDIBLE," but Henry did not notice that legend. The wax paper is pale gray and translucent: the words "NOT EDIBLE" are printed in white on the paper.
The purpose of picking up and serving the doughnut in a piece of wax paper is to prevent the server from getting sticky and to protect the doughnut and consumer from germs. The wax paper also protects the consumer from getting sticky because the consumer holds the doughnut in the paper while eating.
Henry left the bakery with his doughnut in hand, planning to eat it as he drove back to work. Unfortunately, the wax paper stuck to the frosting and tore. Henry did not hear or see the paper tear, as he was busy trying to make it through a yellow light. When he put the last bite of doughnut with the fragment of wax paper into his mouth, he choked on the fragment, crashed the car, and caused injury to himself and damage to the car.
On what theory or theories might Henry recover damages from Bakery and what defenses should be anticipated? Discuss.
[Contracts]
J4. Alice builds swimming pools. She negotiated with Ben, the owner of a luxury hotel famous for its beauty, to build a pool at the hotel for $ 100,000. During negotiations they orally agreed that Alice would build a spa next to the pool for an additional $20,000. Ben told Alice that the underlying soil. might be swampy because the hotel is located near a river. They agreed that even if construction became difficult because of swampy conditions, Alice would still build the pool for $100,000.
Alice and Ben signed a written contract stating:
"Alice agrees to build a swimming pool for Ben according to the attached plans and Ben agrees to pay $100,000. Alice bears the risk of geologic problems. This is the complete and final agreement between the parties." Neither the contract nor the plans said anything about a spa.
Alice commenced excavation. She discovered that Ben's underlying property was solid bedrock, a geologic condition heretofore unheard of in the area. She truthfully explained to Ben that completing excavation would cost an additional $100,000. She refused to continue unless Ben agreed to pay this additional. amount. He reluctantly agreed.
Alice thereafter completed construction using a grade of concrete slightly lower than that specified in the plans. Alice did this intentionally to save money. The lower grade has no impact on the pool's use or durability. However, it does make the pool less attractive. Alice failed to build a spa. Ben has refused to pay Alice anything.
1. To what relief, if any, is Alice entitled and what defenses may Ben assert? Discuss.
2. To what relief, if any, is Ben entitled and what defenses may Alice assert? Discuss.