2003
June 2003 Question 1 [Contracts]
Ted is the President of Chip Co, a small company that makes computer chips for the secondary personal computer market. In the regular course of Chip Co’s business Ted did the following:
Ted sent an e-mail to his daughter Pam, a Vice President of Chip Co, which stated: “This is to confirm our conversation of the other day wherein you agreed to make your home garage available next week to Chip Co for storage of Chip Co items. You will be paid $5.00 per year.” Pam e-mailed back, stating, “That’s right, Dad; the garage is clean and ready for storage.”
Ted also sent an e-mail to Dave, a customer of Chip Co, which stated, “We agree to replace our defective chip in your computer, but only if you agree not to bring any legal action against Chip Co.” Dave sent a return e-mail stating that he agreed to these terms. Ted telephoned Bob, another customer of Chip Co, to confirm that Chip Co will send 100 computer chip units to Bob, who had already fully paid for the units, but only if Bob agreed to pay an additional 10% due to an increase in Chip Co’s operating costs. Bob reluctantly agreed, as he needed the chips immediately.
Ted wrote a letter to Silicon Inc., in which Chip Co offered to buy 10 tons of processed silicon during the coming year, at market price, should Chip Co need any silicon. Silicon Inc. responded, agreeing to sell all the silicon to Chip Co that it might want.
Is there adequate consideration for Chip Co’s agreements above-described with Pam, Dave, Bob and Silicon, Inc.? Discuss.
June 2003 Question 2 [Criminal Law]
Bill and his wife, Alice, fought constantly. On occasion Alice had to miss work when Bill physically beat her up during quarrels. Alice is Chuck’s supervisor at Acme Bank. Chuck would like to take over Alice’s job at the bank. Knowing of Bill’s violent temper, Chuck devised a scheme that he hoped would induce Bill to murder Alice, so that Chuck would be promoted to Alice’s position at the bank.
One evening, Chuck followed Bill to his favorite bar. When Bill had become very drunk, Chuck told him that Alice was having an affair with the bank president and that Chuck had found them locked in an embrace in the president’s office that very afternoon. Chuck’s story was completely fabricated. As Chuck expected, Bill became furious and ran out of the bar in a rage, shouting, “This time I’m going to kill her.”
On the way home, Bill, who was still obviously drunk and in a state of severe agitation, stopped at a sporting goods store and bought a shotgun. The store owner, Dave, sold him the gun, even though Bill stated to Dave that he was going to use it to kill his wife. Bill rushed to his house with the gun, looked through a window, and saw Alice sitting at the dining room table playing cards with a neighbor, Emily. He stood outside the window and took aim at Alice. Meanwhile, Emily’s husband Fred was coming to pick up his wife. Fred saw Bill and tackled him, hoping to disarm Bill before he fired the gun. Unfortunately, Bill pulled the trigger just as he was tackled by Fred, and the deflected shot hit and killed Emily.
With what crime or crimes, if any, should Chuck, Bill, Dave and Fred be charged and what, if any, defenses should each assert? Discuss.
June 2003 Question 3 [Torts]
Flora owns a busy florist shop on a major thoroughfare near a dangerous intersection. The intersection has been the site of recent accidents, some involving cars exiting Flora’s parking lot. Because of this situation she hired Attendant to direct traffic into and out of the parking lot and placed a sign at the lot’s entrance, visible from the street, which states:
“Caution, Cars Entering Street.” Flora also instructed Attendant to make sure that the street was clear before sending a car out, but she provided no other instructions or training. She was aware that Attendant was sometimes careless in his work. Attendant, given the clothes he wears, could not be mistaken for a police officer.
One morning, distracted by the line of honking cars that wished to exit the lot, Attendant waved Customer’s car out of the parking lot with only a hurried glance to determine if the street was clear. Customer heeded Attendant’s signal to exit the lot, but was distracted by her crying baby in the back seat and did not check to see if the street was clear.
Businessman, who was driving toward Flora’s shop, was dialing his cellular phone, and did not see Customer’s car exiting the lot. Businessman, whose driver’s license had expired, collided with Customer. Both drivers were injured and both cars were damaged.
It is a crime to drive with an expired driver’s license. It is also a crime to employ a parking attendant who does not possess a special parking attendant license which costs $50, and requires three hours of safety training relating to operating a parking lot. Any employer of a parking attendant must obtain the license on behalf of the employee and is responsible for ensuring that the employee attends the three hours of safety training. Flora did neither.
On what theory or theories might an action or actions for damages be brought, and what defenses might be anticipated by:
1. Customer against Businessman? Discuss.
2. Customer against Flora? Discuss.
3. Businessman against Flora? Discuss.
4. Customer and Businessman against Attendant? Discuss.
June 2003 Question 4 [Contracts]
Seller sent Buyer a form letter stating that Seller was “offering for sale a full line of zinc bolts, in 1,000 bolt lots, delivery within 30 days.” The letter concluded by stating, “Responses must be received within ten days.” Attached to the letter was a purchase order form. The front of the purchase order form contained the prices of various bolts followed by blank spaces in which the purchaser could enter the desired quantity of bolts.
The back of the purchase order form included the following statement: “Any action for breach of warranty under this contract must be commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued.”
Upon receipt of Seller’s letter, Buyer immediately copied the description and price of one type of bolt from Seller’s form onto the front of Buyer’s own purchase order form, specified a quantity of 1,000 bolts, and sent the form to Seller, who received it three days later. On the back of Buyer’s form was the following statement: “This order is subject to the terms and conditions below.” Paragraph 4 of said form provided in part: “The parties agree that the four-year limitations period provided in Uniform Commercial Code 2-725(1) shall be applicable.”
Section 2-725(1) of the Uniform Commercial Code states: “An action for breach of any contract for sale must be commenced within four years after the cause of action has accrued. By original agreement the parties may reduce the period of limitation to not less than one year but may not extend it.”
The price of zinc rose dramatically in the two weeks following Seller’s receipt of Buyer’s form. Seller then sent a telegram to Buyer stating: “Because of market conditions we cannot fill your order.” Buyer responded with a demand for delivery.
1. If Seller fails to deliver the bolts, will it be liable for breach of contract? Discuss.
2. If Seller does deliver the bolts and they are defective, what is the applicable limitations period for Buyer to file an action for breach of warranty under the contract? Discuss.
October 2003 Question 1 [Contracts]
Rita is beginning a new business as a painter. In order to attract clients, she printed hundreds of flyers that said, “Rita can paint your home for $2,000—Call Rita now to accept this offer!” Each flyer also contained contact information for Rita, including her telephone number. Rita placed the flyers in the local grocery store where neighborhood residents would be likely to see them.
Marvin picked up a flyer and decided to call Rita. He owned a very large home in an adjoining town. Marvin knew that $2,000 for painting his home would be a tremendous bargain for him. He telephoned Rita, and when she answered the phone, Marvin said, “I accept your offer to paint my home for $2,000. Please start as soon as possible.” Before Rita could say a word, Marvin blurted out his home address and abruptly hung up.
Sue also telephoned Rita and asked about having her garage painted. Rita informed Sue that she would have to come to Sue’s home before providing a bid, and the two got together at Sue’s home later that day. After looking over the garage and negotiating the particulars of the paint job, Rita told Sue that she would paint the garage for $700. Sue responded that $700 was a “pretty good price,” but that she wished Rita would do the job for less and needed to consider her options. The following morning, Sue left a phone message on Rita’s answering machine saying that she had decided to accept Rita’s offer.
Rita also received a recorded phone message from Mary, another possible new client, stating, “I saw your flyer in the grocery store. If you can paint my house for $2,000, the job is yours.” The message provided Mary’s address. After Rita drove past Mary’s house to look at the prospective job, she decided to paint Mary’s house. The next day Rita went to Mary’s home, with all the necessary painting supplies, but when she started working on Mary’s home, Mary came running outside and told Rita to stop painting the house, as she had found a different painting contractor for the job.
Does Rita have enforceable contracts with either Marvin, Sue, or Mary? Discuss.
October 2003 Question 2 [Criminal Law]
Able was low on money and short on credit, so he borrowed money from a loan shark who was associated with organized crime. When Able failed to meet the repayment deadline, the loan shark told Able he had one more day to come up with the money or Able would find it “very, very painful.”
Frightened and desperate, Able decided to break into the home of Rich and steal a collection of valuable antique coins. (Able had done some carpentry jobs for Rich on occasion, so he was familiar with his home.) Able knew that the coin collection was kept in a safe in a small room in Rich’s home, so he asked Baker to help him with the heist.
Baker was a master welder and Able knew Baker’s skills would come in handy if they were to steal the coins. Baker agreed and brought a blowtorch with him that night. Able and Baker easily gained entry to the house by cutting a hole in the back door and entered through the hole. They quickly disabled the alarm system and then Baker went to work on the safe with his blowtorch. They had nearly gotten the safe open when Able knocked over the blowtorch. It ignited some curtains nearby and the fire quickly spread. Soon the whole structure was ablaze. Able and Baker fled without having taken anything.
Sam and Carol lived next door to Rich and the fire soon jumped from Rich’s home to their residence. Carol woke up, smelled the smoke, and ran into the living room. Her husband, Sam, was sleeping on the couch. Carol was very angry with Sam. He had told her earlier that evening that he wanted a divorce and Carol now saw a chance for revenge. Carol ran from the burning house, leaving him asleep on the couch. By the time Sam awoke, the house was full of flames and heavy dark smoke. He tried to exit the house, but was quickly overcome by the fire and died.
What crimes, if any, have been committed by Able, Baker, and Carol, and what defenses should each assert? Discuss.
October 2003 Question 3 [Contracts]
Paintco intended to place a bid on the painting work for a large government project, the deadline for which was April 16. Paintco’s president published an advertisement in a local trade paper asking paint suppliers to place bids with Paintco for the furnishing of 10,000 gallons of special paint in accordance with the government’s specifications. The advertisement, published March 1, stated that Paintco was going to bid on the government job, and asked all interested parties to submit their bids, in writing, on or before April 15, specifying that the bids were to be “irrevocable for 30 days.”
On the evening of April 15, Ritzcorp’s president telephoned Paintco and submitted Ritzcorp’s bid orally by leaving a message on Paintco’s answering machine, which was equipped with a voice-decoding feature that translated telephone messages into a written printout. The telephone message, which Paintco’s president both heard and read that evening, identified the speaker as Ritzcorp’s president and stated that his company would supply 8,500 gallons of paint to Paintco at a price of $10 per gallon. The telephone message also stated that the bid price did not include the cost of delivery, that any acceptance of Ritzcorp’s bid must be in writing and must be received by Ritzcorp on or before May 1.
Because Ritzcorp’s bid was the lowest, Paintco used it to compute the price of its own irrevocable bid to the government the next day. On May 1, Paintco was notified that it had won the government contract. The same day it mailed a letter to Ritzcorp stating: “We accept your offer of April 15, but ask that the paint be fully warranted as to quality and that you arrange for delivery of 10,000 gallons of the paint to the job site.” The letter arrived at Ritzcorp’s offices on May 2. Ritzcorp dispatched an e-mail to Paintco that very afternoon, stating that in light of an unexpected rise in the cost of ingredients it was only prepared to offer a price per gallon of $12, and that any paint Paintco chose to purchase would be sold “as is,” without any warranties. After subsequent talks between the parties failed to resolve their differences, Paintco promptly secured a commitment from the next lowest bidder, BrushCorp, to supply all 10,000 gallons at a price of $14 per gallon. Paintco then immediately wrote a letter to Ritzcorp declaring that Ritzcorp had repudiated its contractual commitment to supply paint, and threatening to hold it accountable for all damages.
Paintco completed the government job using the paint supplied by BrushCorp.
What action(s) can Paintco reasonably assert against Ritzcorp, and what would be the likely result of these action(s)? Discuss.
October 2003 Question 4 [Torts]
Peter, walking along the street at 10:00 p.m. on April 20, urgently needed to find a restroom. Just ahead was Dell’s Supper Club (“Dell’s”), which Peter had patronized a few times in the past. There was a sign on the door of Dell’s that said “Restrooms for Patrons Only.” He was not familiar with Dell’s restroom. He entered the dimly lit club and was directed by a waitress toward a door marked “MEN”. Peter opened this door and stepped into an even darker room. Just inside the door, Peter felt for and pushed a light switch, but no light came on because the bulb in the ceiling fixture was burned out. Nevertheless, Peter walked towards what he thought was the toilet, but tripped over a step, fell, and suffered severe cuts and bruises.
Later that night at Dell’s John ordered a steak with mushrooms. Dell’s used canned mushrooms purchased from Acme Foods, which three weeks earlier had discovered that some of its canned mushrooms had been improperly prepared and if eaten could cause botulism. Acme Foods notified all its customers of the problems with the canned mushrooms and offered to replace any cans of mushrooms purchased from them. Dell’s received this notice, but disregarded it. John was served some of the mushrooms in question and as a result contracted botulism, recovering only after five days of severe illness and hospital treatment.
At 6:00 a.m. the next morning Carl, who was paid to pick up the garbage at Dell’s, drove to the back of the club to carry out his duties. He did not see Dell’s large guard dog chained next to the bin to keep out trespassers, and the dog was asleep when Carl entered the bin. As Carl walked to the bin, he startled the dog and it attacked Carl. The dog grabbed Carl’s shoe and held on tightly. Carl managed to get his foot out of the shoe, ran to the fence surrounding the back of the restaurant, and climbed over it to get away from the dog. Once he reached the top of the fence, he fell to the ground on the other side and broke his leg.
What actions could Peter, John and Carl assert against Dell’s, what defenses should Dell’s assert, and what would be the probable results? Discuss.