Contract Law Flashcards
The six major issues to consider when dealing with contracts
1) Applicable Law (Common Law and Statutes, (i.e.) UCC Art. 2 for Sale of Goods)
2) Contract Formation
3) Contract Enforceability
4) Breach of Contract
5) Plainttiff’s Remedies for Defendant’s Breach of Contract
6) Third-Party Interests
Definition: Contract
There are 2 main definitions:
1) Restatement (Second): A contract is “a set of promises for which the breach of which the law gives a remedy, or the performance of which the law in some way recognizes as a duty.” (See Rest. 2d Contracts Chapter 1 § 1.)
2) UCC (sale of goods): A contract is “the total legal obligation which results from the parties’ agreement.” (See UCC § 1-201(11)).
Elements of a Contract
The three elements of most valid contracts are (“OAC”):
- Offer
- Acceptance
- Consideration
The 5 main types of contracts
Five main types are (“BUIEQ”):
- Bilateral Contracts
- Unilateral Contracts
- Implied-in-Fact Contracts
- Express Contracts
- Quasi or Implied-in-Law Contracts
Types of Contracts:
Bilateral Contracts Defined
- A contract formed by the exchange of mutual promises (i.e.) a promise for a promise.
- In other words, a contract of two promises; one from each party.
*Most contracts are bilateral contracts
Types of Contracts:
Unilateral Contracts Defined
A unilateral contract in one in which the only effective mode of acceptance is by either:
1. the performance of an act by the offeree;
or
2. the nonperformance of an act that the offeree is otherwise entitled to carry out.
- Note that the offer in a unilateral contract can normally be revoked any time before a substantial beginning toward performance by the offeree,
- *Typical example of a unilateral contract: a reward offered to the public.
Types of Contracts:
Express Contracts Defined
Express contracts result from words - written or oral.
*Contrast to those contracts formed by conduct
Type of Contracts:
Implied-in-Fact Contracts Defined
Implied -in-Fact contracts are formed by conduct, or manifestations of assent other than language.
Example: If a seller ships goods without a customer’s order, the customer is not obligated to ship the goods back to the seller, or to pay for them, unless the customer takes the delivery and proceeds to use to resell the goods.
Types of Contracts:
Quasi (Implied-in-Law) Contracts Defined
Quasi-contracts (“QC”) are not really contracts. Instead, QCs describe situations where there may be unjust enrichment.
“Unjust enrichment” may occur when: 1) one party enriches another; and 2) it is unjust for the benefited party to accept those benefits without paying for them.
The measure of recovery under QC is the value of the benefit conferred. The contract price is not the measure of recovery. The contract price is usually the highest possible value under QC.
Many casual arrangements in society can be deemed quasi-contracts when a party knowingly accepts a benefit from another party in circumstances where the benefit cannot be considered a gift.
Example: An exterminator who mistakenly treats wrong house with the owner’s knowledge can sue in court to get paid for the fair value of the benefit conferred by his extermination services if the owner who benefitted refuses to pay.
Types of Contract:
Option Contract
An option contract is defined as “a promise which meets the requirements for the formation of a contract and limits the promisor’s power to revoke an offer.” Rest. 2d § 45.
In other words, an option contract is a type of contract that protects an offeree from an offeror’s ability to revoke the contract.
Consideration for an option contract is required, as it is still a form of contract. Normally, an offeree can provide consideration for an option contract by
-paying money for the contract; or
-by rendering other performance; or
-forbearance.
Validity-of-Contract Defenses to Prevent Enforcement
The three types of validity-of-contract defenses are as follows:
- Void Contract: This is a contract that was never valid. A contract with no legal effect from the beginning (i.e.) to commit a crime.
- Voidable Contract: This is a valid and binding contract; however, either or both parties can choose to annul or to ratify because of some legal grounds that include the following:
(a) Lack of capacity or free will of a contracting party, or one contracting party’s undue influence over the other (e.g.) contracts with minors (under 18) or mentally ill parties;
(b) Nondisclosure of one or more material facts;
(c) Misrepresentation;
(d) Mutual mistake; or
(e) A material breach of the terms of the contract. - Unenforceable Contract: This is an otherwise valid agreement but may not be enforceable because of other contract defenses such as the Statute of Frauds or statute of limitations.
Exception to “Lack of Capacity” Contract Defense
Generally, a contract is voidable by a defendant promissor who is a person without capacity to enter into a contract. EXCEPTION: A person without capacity to contract is legally obligated to pay for necessaries like food, shelter, clothing, and medical care.
Such liability is based on the equitable remedy of quasi-contract, not contract law. The policy behind this is to prevent unjust enrichment (i.e.) it is unjust for the benefited party to accept those benefits without paying for them.
The measure of recovery under quasi-contract is the value of the benefit conferred. The contract price is not the measure of recovery. The contract price is usually the highest possible value under quasi-contract.
EXAMPLE: A mentally incompetent tenant leases an apartment and does not pay rent to the landlord. The landlord cannot enforce the contract; however, the landlord may seek remedy in equity under quasi-contract, and the measure of recovery would be the value of the benefit conferred.
Validity of Contract Defense:
Undue Influence vs. Duress
Undue influence is a defense to set aside contracts that have been imposed upon weak and vulnerable persons. An act of persuasion that overcomes the judgment and free will of another can be a factor in determining undue influence.
Undue influence normally results from act(s) of persuasion by a person in a confidential relationship with the alleged victim and said acts help to overcome the free will and judgment of that victim. (Examples include: flattery, insinuations, trickery, and deception; these may amount to undue influence.)
As a defense to validity of a contract, duress differs from undue influence because duress consists of the intentional use of force or threat to coerce another into a grossly unfair transaction.
Typical examples of duress include: blackmail, extortion, Bad faith threats of criminal prosecution, oppressive abuse of process.
Validity of Contract Defense:
Undue Influence (Four Elements)
Generally, the 4 elements of undue influence include:
- Susceptibility of the victim. The alleged victim was susceptible to undue persuasion due to mental, psychological, or physical disabilities or conditions.
- An opportunity for exercising undue influence. Usually, this opportunity arises through a confidential relationship such as husband and wife, trustee and beneficiary, doctor and patient, parent and child, guardian and ward, etc.
- Evidence of motive or inclination by defendant. Must show that the defendant had a motive or was inclined to exercise undue influence over the alleged victim. EX: Defendants that aggressively pursue a transaction, insulate a relationship from outside supervision; or discourage a weaker party from seeking independent advice.
- An usual or suspicious transaction. Typical example is a testator that makes abrupt changes in his will after being diagnosed with terminal illness or being declared incompetent, especially when such changes are prompted by a beneficiary who stands to benefit from the testamentary changes.
Misrepresentation or Nondisclosure as Defense to Contract Enforcement
A misrepresentation is an assertion not in accord with the facts.
The misrepresentation defense to contract requires (1) a false assertion or active concealment of fact that (2) induces the innocent party to reasonably rely and enter into the contract.
Such contract is voidable by the innocent party.
The innocent party does not have to show fraud to rescind the contract but may have to show fraud to get reformation of the contract.
Test tip: For misrepresentation, check if the remedy requested is under contracts or torts. - Under contracts, the remedy will be rescission or reformation of the contract. - Under torts, the remedy would be money damages or status quo ante (request to return the innocent party to where it was before the contract was made).
Mutual Mistake as Defense to Contract Enforcement
A mistake is a belief that is not accord with the facts.
When at the time a contract is made, both parties make a mutual mistake about a material fact, then the contract is voidable.
A mutual mistake may make a contract voidable if
-the mistake was a basic assumption on which the contract was made;
-the mistake pertains to a material fact; AND
-the party seeking to avoid the contract must not bear the risk of the mistake.
A court can reform the contract if expressly requested by a party except to the extent that the rights of third parties will be unfairly affected.
Effect of Unilateral Mistake as Defense to Contract Enforecement
Generally, it is difficult for a party to avoid enforcement of a contract because of a unilateral mistake that was made at a time the contract was made.
However, a unilateral mistake may make a contract voidable if
-the mistake was a basic assumption on which the contract was made;
-the mistake pertains to a material fact;
-the party seeking to avoid the contract must not bear the risk of the mistake; AND
-enforcement of the contract would be unconscionable; OR
-the non-mistaken party had reason to know of the mistake or caused the mistake.
Mistake vs. Misunderstanding
A mistake is a belief that it is not in accord with the facts at the time a contract is made.
A misunderstanding is when the parties agree to a term in a contract but each party applies a different meaning to the term. (See Restatement 2d § 20.)
Such an issue of misunderstanding goes to contract formation (not enforcement)
-whether the parties actually entered into a valid contract; and
-if so, what the terms of the contract are.
Under a mistake, it is not whether a valid contract exists; the issue is whether a mistaken party can avoid enforcement of the contract. EXAMPLE: A misunderstanding could be about whether the weight of an item in a contract was in kilograms or pounds.
Privity of Contract Defined
Privity of contract is a legal doctrine describing individuals who have made a legally enforceable agreement.
The parties to the contract, and not any third-party, can sue each other under the terms of the contracts.
Creation of Contract:
How to Analyze
To enforce a contract, it must be determined whether a contract exists.
To determine if a contract exists, 3 basic issues are examined:
-Was there manifestation of assent between the parties?
-Was there consideration or some substitute for consideration?
-Are there any defenses to refute the creation of a contract?
Formation of Contract:
Manifestation of Assent (Defined)
For a contract to be enforceable, there must be manifestation of assent between the parties that demonstrates that the parties are mutually bound to the same transaction.
For mutual assent, it is not necessary that the parties agree on all terms, only that they agree on the essential ones.
Objective factors are used to determine mutual assent. A party is objectively held to the apparent intention that was manifested to the other party.
Formation of Contract:
Offer (Defined)
The manifestation of an intention to enter into a contract that creates a reasonable expectation in the offeree that his acceptance will create a contract.
An offer creates power of acceptance in the offeree and a corresponding liability for the offeror.
To objectively determine whether a communication constitutes an offer (i.e.) such a reasonable expectation, consider the following factors:
-Was there a communication by the offeror to the offeree containing a promise or commitment to enter into a contract?
-Was there certainty and definiteness in the essential terms?
Formation of Contract:
Offer - Essential Terms
An offer must be sufficient and certain in its terms (i.e.) essential terms.
Determine whether enough of the essential terms are present so that a contract including them could objectively be enforced.
What is deemed essential depends on the type of contract in question. Essential terms typically include the following:
-Identity of the offeree
-Subject matter
-Price
-Time of performance (i.e.) payment, delivery, etc.
-Quantity
-Nature of work to be performed
For sale of goods, UCC §2-204(3) liberally provides: “Though one or more terms are left open, a contract for sale does not fail for indefiniteness if the parties have intended to make a contract and there is a reasonably certain basis for giving an appropriate remedy”
Formation of Contract:
Offer - UCC Gap Fillers
UCC Article 2 supplies terms where the parties have left gaps in their agreement so that the parties can make an entire bargain.
UCC §2-311(1): “An agreement for sale which is otherwise sufficiently definite leaves particulars of performance to be specified by one of the parties. Any such specification must be in good faith and within limits set by commercial reasonableness.”