Contracts

The topic of this podcast is UCC § 2-601, which is popularly known as the Perfect Tender Rule.

The topic of this podcast is when agreements that are not enforceable as contracts because they are not supported by consideration are nevertheless enforceable due to reliance on the promise, often referred to as promissory estoppel. It discusses reliance as it pertains to gift promises, including charitable donations. The podcast examines the rule for promissory estoppel, as set forth in Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 90, as well as the form of remedy permitted in cases based upon reliance. To illustrate, the podcast uses several hypotheticals and looks at the following cases: Kirksey v. Kirksey, Ricketts v. Scothorn, and Bouton v. Byers.

This podcast discusses the topic of Third Party Beneficiaries. When can a person who is not party to a contract sue to enforce the contract? While the rule can be found in Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 302, it can be difficult to apply. This podcast explains how to determine the intent of the parties when considering whether the third party is a third party beneficiary. Concepts covered in this podcast include an incidental beneficiary, creditor beneficiary, and an intended beneficiary. The podcast includes the analysis for several hypotheticals and Lawrence v. Fox, 20 N.Y. 268 (1859). 

This podcast will explain when a court will supply a condition even where the parties have not expressly written one into the contract. It distinguishes between a promise and a condition under Restatement (Second) Contracts §§ 2 and 224. This podcast references two other podcasts: Express Conditions and the Excuse of Conditions that is used by courts to avoid harsh results of conditions. Additionally, this podcast provides hypotheticals that illustrate the relationship between implied conditions and the rule of constructive conditions of exchange.

This podcast explains when a court will excuse satisfaction of a condition to avoid the harsh effects of forfeiture when a condition fails. It also looks at what happens when a court has determined that there is a condition and the failure of the condition might cause a hardship. This podcast is related to the discussion of conditions in two other podcasts: Express Conditions and Implied Conditions, and contrasts the court’s application of excuse of conditions with express conditions. The podcast includes an explanation of restitution as it relates to excuse of condition as well as a brief explanation of Clark v. West Publishing Company. The podcast concludes with an explanation of Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 229.

The topic of this podcast is when language in a contract is an express condition, such that failure to satisfy the condition results in a performance not being due. A condition can be a good way to hedge in case a party is concerned that it can’t meet its commitments and wants to avoid being in breach of contract. This podcast is related to the discussion of conditions in two other podcasts: Excuse of Conditions and Implied Conditions. This podcast discusses Clark v. West Publishing Company, and explains why drafters should use terms such as “if” or “on condition that” to make it clear that a term is a condition. 

This podcast explores the basic concept of mitigation, or, as it is sometimes called, avoidable consequences, which is used in computing damages. Mitigation is a principle that can limit a plaintiff’s recovery in a claim for breach of contract. The principle is stated in Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 350(1). The podcast also discusses Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co. and the twist on the common law rule of mitigation found in U.C.C. § 2-704. 

The topic of this podcast is Tortious Interference - when one of the parties to a contract claims that a third party wrongfully interfered with the contract by inducing the other party to breach. The rule for when tortious interference arises after a contract can be found in Restatement (Second) of Torts § 766. Tortious interference can also arise before the contract is formed, when the third party is claimed to have interfered with the formation of a contract. The podcast includes a discussion of defenses to a claim of tortious interference, and examines the fine line between unlawful and permissible interference per Restatement (Second) of Torts § 767. The cases Texaco, Inc. v. Pennzoil Co. and Phillips v. MEA are covered, as is the movie The Insider which was based on a real tortious interference case. 

This podcast explains the concept of Accord and Satisfaction, with a focus on when an accord is formed and when performance under the accord results in a satisfaction. This concept differs from modification. With accord and satisfaction, one party has completed performance and the other party’s only obligation is to render its performance -- usually the payment of money. So the party who has performed is in the position of a creditor and the party who has not performed is in the position of a debtor.

The topic of this podcast is the basic concept of certainty in computing damages. Certainty is a principle that can limit a plaintiff's recovery in a claim for breach of contract. According to Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 352, "Damages are not recoverable for loss beyond an amount that the evidence permits to be established with reasonable certainty." The podcast discusses what certainty requires and the purpose behind certainty. It further discusses when certainty might apply - such as in cases involving a new business or lost royalties - methods of proving certainty, and how certainty is treated in the courts. Several hypotheticals are explored, as is the case Freund v. Washington Square Press.  

The topic of this podcast is when rights under a contract may be assigned to third parties, and when duties may be delegated to third parties. Using hypotheticals to illustrate, it discusses the exceptions that limit the transfer of rights and duties to a third party. The assignability of the right to receive money, and the liability involved with the delegation of a duty to pay money, are also covered. Finally, it examines prohibitions of assignment of rights or delegation of duties, including what it means to enforce such a prohibition. UCC Article 9, UCC § 2-210(5), and UCC § 2-210(6) are discussed. 

This podcast explains when agreements are not enforceable as contracts because they are not supported by consideration due to the fact that the promise is based on past action or a moral obligation. It also presents common situations involving past consideration, including the exception provided under the material benefit rule. The cases Mills v. Wyman and Webb v. McGowin are discussed. 

The topic of this podcast is when consequential damages can be recovered for breach of contract because they are foreseeable. The podcast examines the rules established in Hadley v. Baxendale to determine if a loss is foreseeable and therefore recoverable as a consequential damage, as well as some practical effects of those rules. It also looks at how Article 2 of the UCC handles disclaimers for liability for consequential damages. 

The topic of this podcast is the basic concept of good faith. Good faith, sometimes called the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, is an implied term in a party's obligation of performance in every contract. The podcast examines both the subjective and objective standards of good faith. It discusses the obligations of good faith under the common law - as expressed in Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 205 - and the Uniform Commercial Code § 1-304. It provides some history on the evolution of good faith in UCC Articles 1 and 2, and considers the variations on the definition of good faith adopted among the jurisdictions. Finally, the podcast covers the consequences of a breach of good faith. The cases of Reid v. Key Bank, Billman v. Hensel, and Neumiller Farms v. Cornett are discussed.

This podcast examines when agreements are enforceable as contracts because they are supported by consideration. The podcast looks at common descriptions of consideration, including benefit-detriment and “bargained-for exchange.” It also considers traditional issues of consideration and common disputes involving unequal bargains, nominal or sham consideration, and past consideration. The podcast discusses several hypotheticals and also the following cases: Schnell v. Nell, 17 Ind. 29 (1861), Hamer v. Sidway, 124 N.Y. 538, 27 N.E. 256 (1891), and Basatkis v. Demotsis, 226 S.W.2d 673 (Tex. Civ. App. 1949).

This podcast considers when agreements are not enforceable as contracts because they are not supported by consideration due to the fact that the promise is a gift. Analyzing hypotheticals, the podcast examines common situations involving gift promises, including conditional gifts, and charitable promises. Cases discussed include Schnell v. Nell, 17 Ind. 29 (1861) and Hamer v. Sidway, 124 N.Y. 538, 27 N.E. 256 (1891).

This podcast explains how an offeree can accept an offer for the sale of goods under UCC § 2-206. The podcast considers examples of the application of subsections (1)(a) and (b). 

This podcast discusses a discharge of duties such that parties do not have to perform their contractual obligations and cannot demand performance under the other party's contract. Consideration is required to support enforcement of an agreement, including a modification of a contract resulting in a discharge of duties. This podcast will look at discharge by rescission, substituted performance, substituted contract, novation, and accord and satisfaction. We will also look at when a discharge is enforceable where it is supported by consideration, including where there is the use of an instrument under U.C.C. § 3-311. The podcast steps you through analyzing numerous hypos. 

The topic of this podcast is when contract modifications are not enforceable due to the pre-existing duty rule. Consideration is required to support enforcement of an agreement, including a modification to an agreement. In this podcast, we will look at when the pre-existing duty rule renders modifications unenforceable and when the modern common law rule and the rule of UCC § 2-209 permit enforcement of some modified agreements in the absence of new consideration. 

The topic of this podcast is when silence itself can be acceptance of an offer. Acceptance is simply the name given to an offeree's action in making the offeror's promise enforceable. This podcast looks at the exceptional cases where notification of the intention to accept an offer is accomplished by silence. 

The topic of this podcast is a basic overview of when warranties are given for the sales of goods under Article 2 of the UCC. An additional podcast will discuss how warranties can be disclaimed or limited.

The topic of this podcast is the Parol Evidence Rule. In general, there is no probem with oral agreements. There are a few exceptions where the agreement has to be evidenced by a writing to satisfy the Statute of Frauds, but by and large oral agreements are perfectly valid.

The topic of this podcast is formation of the contract under U.C.C. § 2-207. This is the first in a series of three podcasts covering the Battle of the Forms. The second podcast covers Finding the Terms of the Contract. The third covers Written Confirmations.

The topic of this podcast is written confirmations under § 2-207 of the U.C.C., a section often referred to as the Battle of the Forms. This is the third in a series of podcasts about § 2-207 of the Uniform Commercial Code.