Chapter 8. Unenforceability on Grounds of Public Policy (178-199) Flashcards
(106 cards)
A promises to pay B $1,000 if the Buckets win their basketball game with the Hoops, and B promises to pay A $2,000 if the Hoops win. A state statute makes wagering a crime and provides that a promise such as A’s or B’s is “void.” Are these promises enforceable under public policy?
A’s and B’s promises are unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Any claims of A or B to restitution for money paid under the agreement are governed by the rules stated in Topic 5 of §§ 178–199. See § 199(b) and Illustrations 4 and 5 to that section. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(a)
A and B make an agreement by which A agrees to sell and B to buy, at a fixed price per bushel, one thousand bushels of wheat from A at any time that A shall choose during the following month. The state statute that makes wagering a crime does not apply to such an agreement and it does not offend any judicially declared public policy. Are these promises enforceable under public policy?
Enforcement of A’s and B’s promises is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(a)
A borrows $10,000 from the B Bank, promising to repay it with interest at the rate of twelve per cent. A state statute that fixes the maximum legal rate of interest on such loans at ten per cent provides that a promise to pay a greater sum is “void” as usurious as to all the promised interest but not as to the principal. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
A’s promise to pay the interest is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. The rule stated in § 184(2) does not make A’s promise to pay interest enforceable up to ten per cent because the legislation provides otherwise. Compare Illustration 5 to § 184. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(a)
A and B make an agreement for the sale of goods for $10,000, in which A promises to deliver the goods in his own truck at a designated time and place. A municipal parking ordinance makes unloading of a truck at that time and place an offense punishable by a fine of up to $50. A delivers the goods to B as provided. Is B’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Because the public policy manifested by the ordinance is not sufficiently substantial to outweigh the interest in the enforcement of B’s promise, enforcement of his promise is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(c)
A promises to employ B and B promises to work for A, all work to be done on weekdays. The agreement is made on Sunday in violation of a statute that makes the doing of business on Sunday a misdemeanor. Are these promises possibly enforceable under public policy?
If the court decides that the public policy manifested by the statute is not sufficiently substantial to outweigh the interests in enforcement of A’s and B’s promises, it will hold that enforcement of their promises is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(c)
A, the owner of a newspaper, promises B that he will publish a statement about C known by A and B to be false and defamatory if B pays him $10,000. B pays A $10,000. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
A’s promise is one to commit a tort (§ 192) and is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
B promises to pay A, the owner of a newspaper, $10,000 if he will publish a statement about C known by A and B to be false and defamatory. A publishes the libel. Is B’s promise enforceable under public policy?
B’s promise is one tending to induce A to commit a tort (§ 192) and is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A, the owner of a newspaper, promises B that he will publish a statement about C known by A and B to be false and defamatory if B will promise to pay him $10,000. B makes the promise. Are these promises enforceable under public policy?
A’s promise is one tending to induce A to commit a tort (§ 192). Both promises are unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
B promises to convey a tract of land worth $11,000 to A, the owner of a newspaper, if A pays B $1,000, B’s duty to be conditional on A’s publishing a statement about C known by A and B to be false and defamatory. A pays B $1,000 and publishes the libel. Is B’s promise enforceable under public policy?
B’s promise is one tending to induce A to commit a tort (§ 192) and is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Compare § 185. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A pays B, a competitor, $10,000 for B’s promise not to compete with A for a year. Is B’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Although B’s refraining from competition with A would not in itself be improper, B’s promise not to compete with A unreasonably restrains B from competition (§ 186) and is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A promises to pay B, a competitor, $10,000 if he will refrain from competing with A for a year. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Although B’s refraining from competing with A would not in itself be improper, A’s promise unreasonably tends to induce B to refrain from competition (§ 186) and is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A induces B to make an agreement to buy goods on credit from A by bribing B’s purchasing agent. A delivers the goods to B. A’s bribe tends to induce the agent to violate his fiduciary duty. Is B’s promise enforceable under public policy?
B’s promise to pay the price is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. See § 193. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A, who wants to induce B to buy goods from him, promises to pay C $1,000 if he will bribe B’s purchasing agent to arrange the sale. C does so. C’s bribe tends to induce the agent to violate his fiduciary duty. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
A’s promise is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. See § 193. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A, who wants to induce B to buy goods from him, promises to pay C $1,000 if he arranges the sale. C arranges the sale by bribing B’s purchasing agent. C’s bribe tends to induce the agent to violate his fiduciary duty. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
A’s promise is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. See § 193. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A and B make an agreement for exclusive dealing that is unenforceable because unreasonably in restraint of trade (§ 186). A sells and delivers goods pursuant to the unenforceable agreement to C, who promises to pay the price. Is C’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Because the relation between C’s promise to pay the price and the unreasonable restraint is too remote, enforcement of C’s promise is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A and B make a wagering agreement in violation of a statute that makes such agreements “void.” When A loses, C pays B at A’s request, and A promises C to pay him that amount. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Because the relation between A’s promise to pay C and the improper wager is too remote, enforcement of A’s promise is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(d)
A agrees to reimburse B for any legal expenses incurred if B will go on C’s land in order to test a right of way that is disputed by A and C. B goes on C’s land. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Enforcement of A’s promise is not precluded on grounds of public policy, even if it is later determined that B has committed a trespass. Compare § 192. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(e)
A, a trustee under a will, makes an agreement with B in violation of A’s fiduciary duty. Are these promises enforceable under public policy?
If enforcement of A’s and B’s promises is desirable for the protection of the beneficiaries, it is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Compare § 193. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(e)
A, B, and C, directors of a bank, make notes payable to the bank in order to deceive the bank examiner. They agree that the notes shall be returned and cancelled after they have served their purpose. Are these promises enforceable under public policy?
Enforcement of the promises of A, B and C embodied in the notes is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 178(e)
A and B make a written agreement that contains a term providing that “no prior negotiations shall be used to interpret this agreement.” Prior negotiations would otherwise be admissible to establish the meaning of the writing (§ 214(c)). How might these promises be possibly unenforceable under public policy?
If the court decides that the term would unreasonably deprive it of relevant evidence that would enable it to resolve an ambiguity in the agreement and thereby hamper it in the fair administration of justice, it will hold that the term is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 179(a)
A induces B to make an agreement to buy goods on credit from A by bribing B’s purchasing agent. A delivers the goods to B. A state statute makes such bribery a crime and gives B a civil action to recover the amount of the bribe against A. Is B’s promise possibly enforceable under public policy?
Although the statute already provides for a civil sanction, a court may decide that B’s promise to pay the price is unenforceable on grounds of public policy. Cf. Illustration 12 to § 178. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 179(b)
A, a corporation, makes an agreement to do work for B, a city. C, an official of B, is also a principal shareholder of A, and a statute prohibits the making of such agreements and subjects those who make them to penalties. A’s performance of the agreement is defective. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Since the statute was enacted to protect a class of persons to which B belongs against a class to which A belongs, enforcement of A’s promise is not precluded on grounds of public policy and B can recover damages from A for breach of contract. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 179(c)
A, an insurance company, issues a policy of fire insurance to B on his house. The policy differs from that required by a state statute prescribing a standard fire policy. B’s house is destroyed by fire. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
Since the statute was enacted to protect a class of persons to which B belongs against a class to which A belongs, enforcement of A’s promise is not precluded on grounds of public policy and B can recover the insurance proceeds from A. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 179(c)
A employs B to work in his factory and promises to pay him double for the overtime if B works ten hours a day instead of the usual eight. A state statute, designed to protect the health of workers in such factories, provides a maximum period of employment of eight hours a day and makes violation a crime for both employer and employee. B works ten hours a day but A refuses to pay him extra for the overtime. Is A’s promise enforceable under public policy?
A court may decide that the statute was enacted to protect a class of persons to which B belongs against a class to which A belongs and that therefore enforcement of A’s promise is not precluded on grounds of public policy. Restatement 2d of Contracts § 179(c)