June 2009 Question 1 [Torts]
Al, Bob, Carl, and Dolly were coworkers at Zco. Al, Bob, and Carl did not like Dolly and wanted her fired from Zco.
On Monday, all employees of Zco were required to attend a mandatory meeting. Prior to the meeting, Al entered Dolly’s office and told her not to leave her office until the meeting was over. He then said to her, “If you leave this office before the meeting is over, some of my friends and I will come to your home and beat you up.” Al then left for the meeting. Dolly, scared for her safety, remained in her office, missed the meeting, and was reprimanded by Carl, her supervisor.
On Tuesday, Bob placed a sleeping pill in Dolly’s coffee when Dolly was not looking. Dolly drank the coffee and fell asleep at her desk twenty minutes later. She slept for four hours, and was again reprimanded by Carl for sleeping on the job.
On Wednesday, the Human Resources Manager for Zco asked Carl if he knew why Dolly had missed the meeting on Monday and fell asleep at her desk on Tuesday. Carl responded that Dolly had a serious drinking problem that interfered with her job performance. Carl was aware of the actual reasons why Dolly had missed the meeting on Monday and fell asleep on Tuesday, and he had no reason to believe that she had a drinking problem. On Thursday, Dolly was fired from Zco.
Under what intentional tort theories might an action for damages be brought by Dolly against Al, Bob, and Carl, and what defenses, if any, might Al, Bob, or Carl assert, and what are the likely results? Discuss.
June 2009 Question 2 [Contracts]
Delta Print Co. (“Delta”) ordered three identical Model 100 printing presses from Press Manufacturer Co. (“Press”). Delta’s written order form described the items ordered by model number. Delta agreed to pay Press $25,000 for each Model 100 press. A few days later, Press sent Delta its own form confirming the order. Press’s form repeated all of the items on Delta’s form, but added the clause, “Delta must make any complaints concerning defects in, or nonconformity of, the goods delivered within a reasonable period after delivery.”
One week later, Press delivered the Model 100 printing presses to Delta’s place of business. Delta immediately removed its old printing presses and placed two of the new presses into operation. Delta stored the third new press in its original unopened carton. One week after delivery, Delta’s Vice President for Operations, Vanessa, notified Press’s Sales Manager, Sally, that it wanted to return the third press. Sally asked why it wanted to return the press, and Vanessa responded, “Delta doesn’t need a third press at this time.” Sally replied that all sales were final and that Delta was obligated to pay for all three presses. Vanessa said that Delta did not want the third press and expected Press to pick it up immediately. Sally responded that she would have a truck pick up the third press the next day, but that Delta was expected to pay for all three presses.
The next day, Press picked up the third press. Press sold the third press to Offset Printing Co. (“Offset”) a week later for $22,000 — a discount off the contract price of $25,000. It cost Press $18,000 to build the Model 100 press. Offset is one of the largest printing companies in State X and regularly purchases multiple Model 100 printing presses from Press. Press maintains a large inventory of the Model 100 printing press because of its popularity.
Delta has not yet paid for any of the three Model 100 presses despite repeated demands by Press.
Is Press likely to prevail in an action against Delta for breach of contract and, if so, what is the likely measure of damages? Discuss.
June 2009 Question 3 [Criminal Law]
At 3 a.m. the City Police Department received a call that there was an unauthorized entry into Walt’s Gun Emporium (“Walt’s”), a store that sells firearms.
As the police officers drove around a corner behind Walt’s to investigate the incident, they observed a man placing something into the trunk of a red car parked across the street from Walt’s. The red car’s engine was running. When the officers turned the police car’s siren and lights on, the red car immediately sped away. One officer exited the police car and arrested Albert, the person who had been standing behind the red car, while the other officer followed the fleeing red car.
The police officer who arrested Albert then saw Burt slide a sealed box labeled “Walt’s Gun Emporium” and crawl out of a store window. The officer then arrested Burt. It was later determined that the box contained six rifles.
While being chased by the police, the red car crashed into another car, killing its driver Vic. Chuck, the driver of the red car, was arrested. A sealed box stamped with the words “Walt’s Gun Emporium” containing twelve pistols was found in the trunk of the red car.
Albert, Burt, and Chuck were each charged with larceny and murder.
At trial, Walt, the owner of Walt’s, testified for the prosecution that Burt was employed by Walt’s as a salesperson. Walt also testified that he was the only person working at Walt’s authorized to open sealed boxes containing firearms or to remove the boxes from the gun vault where they were stored.
Albert testified that he was given $10 by Chuck to help carry boxes to the red car, and that he had never seen Chuck or Burt before.
Burt testified that he was authorized by Walt’s to possess the firearms located at the store in order to fulfill his duties as a salesperson.
Chuck testified that Burt convinced him that Burt owned the guns and that Burt had agreed to sell them to Chuck for $400.
Do the facts support each of the charges against Albert, Burt, and Chuck and what defenses, if any, might they each reasonably assert? Discuss.
June 2009 Question 4 [Torts]
During the late summer, State College of Law held its annual student versus faculty softball game and picnic. The game was hotly contested and, as a result of poor sportsmanship on both sides, tempers flared.
Following the game, the students’ team was presented with the winner’s trophy, which Abel, the captain of the student team, held aloft. Thinking it would be funny, Charlie, a member of the faculty team, threw a ball at the trophy, striking it and knocking it from Abel’s hands. Angrily, Abel picked up the trophy, approached Charlie and said, “If you weren’t a professor here, I would take that trophy and stick it in your ear.” Charlie, who was physically much bigger than Abel and a former professional boxer, did not feel threatened by Abel’s reaction.
Edward, another professor and member of the faculty team, believing that Abel was about to attack Charlie, struck Abel with a baseball bat, resulting in a large bruise to Abel’s arm.
1. Under what theory or theories might Charlie bring an action for damages against Abel, what defenses, if any, might Abel assert, and what is the likely result? Discuss.
2. Under what theory or theories might Abel bring an action for damages against Edward, what defenses, if any, might Edward assert, and what is the likely result? Discuss.
October 2009 Question 1 [Torts]
Darby organized a political rally attended by approximately 1,000 people in support of a candidate challenging the incumbent in the upcoming mayoral election. Sheila, the wife of the challenging candidate, was the main speaker. When Darby introduced Sheila, he described her as a “. . .kind woman of the people.” In his introduction he also referred to Patty, the wife of the current mayor, as “. . . a snob, who is so cutthroat that she said very nasty things about her closest friend when that friend applied for membership to an exclusive private women’s club of which Patty is a member.” Darby’s statements were reported in the print and television media.
Darby had heard this information about Patty from a notorious local gossip and the information was largely false. In fact, when Patty’s friend was rejected for club membership, Patty was one of her staunchest supporters in the application process. Darby’s statement put a strain on Patty’s relationship with her friend who, upon hearing of Darby’s comments, cancelled an upcoming lunch she and Patty had scheduled several weeks before the rally.
At the time Darby spoke at the rally, Patty had not been involved publicly in her husband’s campaign or political activities. Two days before the rally, Patty appeared with her husband in public for the first time when she learned that Sheila was going to speak at the rally.
1. Under what theory, or theories, if any, might Patty bring an action against Darby? Discuss.
2. What defense or defenses, if any, might Darby assert, and what is the likely result? Discuss.
October 2009 Question 2 [Criminal Law]
Vladimir owed Donald a gambling debt. Knowing that Vladimir had a new laptop computer, Donald sent an e-mail to Brenda, who lived close to Vladimir. The e-mail informed Brenda that Donald had left his laptop at the home of Vladimir, who was away for the weekend, but that Vladimir had given Donald permission to retrieve his laptop while Vladimir was gone. In the e-mail Donald asked Brenda to go to Vladimir’s house, locate the door key under the mat on the porch, and bring the laptop to Donald.
Corky, who was at Brenda’s house when Donald sent the e-mail to her, read the e-mail and rushed over to Vladimir’s house to steal the laptop. When Brenda later arrived at Vladimir’s house to retrieve the laptop for Donald, she found the back door open and Corky ransacking the house. Corky was so startled that he fell backwards, hit his head on a table and lost consciousness as he fell to the floor. Brenda went upstairs where she searched for and found the laptop. Always wanting a laptop, she put Vladimir’s laptop in her purse to keep for herself. Brenda then called 911. Before the police arrived, Corky regained consciousness and fled out the back door.
When the police arrived at Vladimir’s house, Brenda told them that she believed Corky had taken a laptop from the house. When the police went to Corky’s house, they found him dead from his head injury.
What crimes, if any, might Donald, Brenda and Corky reasonably be charged with, and what defenses, if any, might each assert? Discuss.
October 2009 Question 3 [Contracts]
Betsy contacted Sam, a salesman who works for Luxe, a company that sells luxury boats, and told him that she was interested in purchasing a luxury boat. Luxe provided Betsy with free airfare and lodging at a hotel resort near the Luxe boat showroom. After shopping at the showroom, Betsy became interested in the Wind Catcher model priced at $200,000. Sam explained to Betsy the features of the Wind Catcher and told her that it was “state of the art.” Sam gave Betsy a one-page purchase order form on which the words “Wind Catcher” were written in the blank space marked “Boat Model,” and “$200,000” was written in the blank space marked “Price.” Just above the signature line in red italics were the words “This offer by Purchaser is irrevocable for thirty (30) days. All sales are final when approved by Luxe.”
Before Betsy left the hotel the next day, Sam came by to tell her that he had just learned that Luxe was about to raise its prices, but that she could order the Wind Catcher at the current price if she quickly returned the purchase order form she had received the night before. When Betsy returned home, she checked prices on the internet for comparable boats and decided the price quoted by Luxe for the Wind Catcher was a good deal. She signed and faxed the purchase order form to Luxe.
After receiving the purchase order form from Betsy, Sam prepared the documents that Betsy would need to register the boat and went to the boat harbor where Betsy planned to keep the boat to make sure that the docking facilities were adequate for the Wind Catcher.
A few days later, Betsy learned that, despite what Sam had said, Luxe had no plans to raise its prices and that the Wind Catcher was an older model without the navigation and safety features available on newer models. She immediately faxed a letter to Luxe stating that she did not want to make the purchase. That same afternoon Betsy received in the mail from Luxe a photocopy of the purchase order form that was stamped “Accepted” and signed by Luxe.
Under what theory or theories may Luxe be successful in a breach of contract action against Betsy? Discuss.
October 2009 Question 4 [Torts]
Billy, a minor, was suspended from school for throwing an eraser at his teacher. The school principal told Billy’s parents that, in the opinion of the school psychologist, Billy should be admitted to a facility where he could be treated for his anger problem. The principal gave the parents a copy of the psychologist’s report, which stated that there was a 90% certainty that Billy would hurt someone if he did not receive proper treatment. Billy’s parents admitted they had known about his anger problem for about a year, but had done nothing about it.
Billy’s parents ignored the principal’s advice and instead sent him to stay with his uncle Dan during the suspension from school. On the first day at his uncle’s house Billy began playing an electric guitar so loudly it could be heard a block away. Paul, a neighbor, worked as a therapist out of a home he rented near Dan. Paul called Dan and complained that the loud music was interfering with the therapy session of one of Paul’s patients. Dan apologized and immediately had Billy lower the sound on his guitar amplifier.
Later that day, before Dan went out, he told Billy to continue to keep the volume of the music down because of Paul’s complaint. After Dan left, however, Billy once again began to play the guitar very loudly. Paul immediately went to Dan’s house to complain about the music. Paul told Billy that if he did not turn down the music volume, Paul would call the police. Billy told Paul to mind his own business.
As Paul began to walk back home, Billy yelled to Paul: “If you ever complain about my music again I will make you pay!” When Paul did not respond, Billy threw a large rock at Paul. The rock missed Paul but hit Penny, who was walking by. Penny suffered severe injuries as a result of being hit in the head by the rock Billy threw.
Billy did not play his guitar loudly again.
1. Under what theory or theories, if any, might Paul bring an action against Dan? Discuss.
2. Under what theory or theories, if any, might Paul bring an action against Billy? Discuss.
3. Under what theory or theories, if any, might Penny bring an action against Billy? Discuss.
4. Under what theory or theories, if any, might Penny bring an action against Billy’s parents? Discuss.