Statute of Frauds
A student orally signs up for a loan at the bank, which he agrees to pay off in 11 months. The student's mother goes to the bank 10 months later and orally tells them she will guarantee her son's repayment. She then leaves a signed note to her son: "I told the bank I would pay off your loan if you can't by the end of the month."
Is the mother's deal with the bank within the Statue of Frauds and if so, what provision is it under?
Yes, suretyship. (The writing never needs to be seen by the obligee to be a sufficient memorandum.)
REI takes all possible care to ensure that their tent poles are well designed and safe to use. There is no additional precaution they could take without defeating the utility of the product. Still, a kid had his eye taken out when a pole snapped unexpectedly.
Between the sale and use of the tent pole, the condition of the poles did not substantially change.
Is REI liable for the child's injuries?
Yes, under Restatement of Torts 402A, as long as the seller is engaged in the business of selling the product and the product did not change before it reached the customer, the seller is strictly liable.
This applies even if the seller took all possible care in preparation and sale of the product.
Pim, a deaf feller, does not hear a police car's sirens and is hit when he crossed the street at a crosswalk without looking.
Did Pim breach a duty to himself by failing to notice the car?
Yes, while he is held to the duty of a reasonably prudent deaf person, they still have a duty to themself to use what senses they do have to ensure a car isn't coming when they cross the street.
Plaintiff (DE) has sued Defendant (PA) in federal court over a tort claim for $90,000. Plaintiff wants to join a second Defendant from Delaware for a tort claim arising out of the same events with an amount in controversy of $60,000. There is personal jurisdiction.
Does the court have Supplemental Jurisdiction over the second defendant?
No, this is a diversity case and the second defendant busts diversity, violating 1367(b).
A Facebook user agreed to the platform's terms and conditions without reading them. When Facebook takes down her post for violating content guidelines listed in the terms an conditions, she sues.
Will she be successful?
No, an offeree failing to read an offer due to their own negligence is bound by the terms stated in the offer.
A planner hires a construction company to build a home on a plot of land. It is reasonably estimated that the project will take 10-15 months to complete and will cost $30,000 in total. The planner agrees orally to pay $45,000 upon completion.
If the planner breaches, can he use the Statute of Frauds as a defense?
No, contracts incidentally related to the land, such as building a structure, are not tied to the party's interest in the land and not within the Statute of Frauds.
McDonald's sells hamburgers and meets all health regulations in the food they sell. After an e-coli outbreak near one franchise, the FDA traces the outbreak to contaminated vegetables produced at West Farm, the primary supplier for that McDonald's franchise.
A group of McDonald's customers who got e-coli shortly after eating at the franchise sue, who is liable for the injuries they suffered if they were infected by McDonald's lettuce?
All parties within the chain of commerce before the lettuce was given to the customer, including the franchise and the farm.
A outdoor rifle range sets up its targets in front of a barrier of stones. The range sits in a field and there are signs reading "DANGER! LIVE FIRE! DO NOT ENTER!" blocking people from walking behind the barrier.
One day, a man is walking by the range and stops to watch from outside the range's property. One bullet strikes a stone and ricochets sideways, hitting the man and injuring him.
If it is found that the range had a duty to the man, what is the best alternative conduct he could suggest to show the range breached its duty?
Use a dirt/sand barrier or other material not prone to ricochet.
It is general practice at outdoor ranges to place targets in front of hills or mounds that will absorb the bullet. Using a material prone to ricochet is a but-for cause of the injury.
The man never stepped behind the barrier and was not on the range's property, so additional warnings would not have worked and the range could not prevent him from standing where he was.
In a federal diversity case, a plaintiff attempted to join a second defendant for a claim arising out of the same nucleus of operative fact. The new defendant does not bust diversity and there is personal jurisdiction. However, the court still declined the second claim.
On appeal, the plaintiff says the court erred in denying the second defendant since 1367(a) and (b) were satisfied.
Did the court err in not allowing the plaintiff to join the additional case through supplemental jurisdiction?
No, even if the claim would be allowed under 1367, 1367(c) allows the Court to use its discretion to decline claims it deems should not be in federal court.
Carla emails Diego offering to sell “my Jaguar for $6,000.” Carla owns both a Jaguar-brand guitar and an old Jaguar car. She intends to sell the guitar, but Diego believes she means the car. Diego responds, “I accept your offer for the Jaguar. I can pick it up Friday.”
When Diego arrives expecting the car, Carla presents the guitar. Diego refuses to pay, insisting the contract was for the car. Carla sues for breach.
Is there an enforceable contract?
No, a contract generally does not exist if there is a mutual misunderstanding about a material fact and neither party knows or has reason to know of the misunderstanding.
After years of arguing over lawnmowing contracts, Bob and Alice decide to get married. They sign a written contract which only states that each party promises to marry the other within one year. Before the ceremony, the contract is accidentally destroyed in a shredder.
If Bob or Alice repudiates, is the marriage contract within the Statute of Frauds?
No, promises solely for mutual marriage are not within the Statute of Frauds, and written evidence would not need to be produced to prove the validity of the contract.
A manufacturer makes toys for children and follows national safety regulations for making toys for small children. The manufacturer uses a third party company to make deliveries.
While being delivered to a retailer, a shipment of toys are damaged, creating a defect that creates a risk for children.
A child gets hurt after playing with one of the toys and it is proven that the defect occurred during shipment. If the family sues the manufacturer, will it be liable?
No, unless the family can prove that the toy's design made it vulnerable to damage in transit.
A plaintiff must be able to prove that a manufacturing defect existed at the time it left the defendant's hands.
A dog suspected of rabies is quarantined for 14 days before animal control decides it is clean and lets it go. A CDC statute requires animals suspected of rabies to be quarantined for at least 21 days before being released to avoid further infection. 22 days after it was initially quarantined, the dog bites a woman. Her arm is torn up and needs stitches. She sues animal control for violating the statute by letting the dog go.
Is animal control negligent per se?
Plaintiff in scope: Yes, general public is protected.
Injury in scope: Likely not, since the spread of rabies is the focus of the statute, dog bites is likely too broad.
Causation: No, even if they waited 21 days, the dog still would have been released at the time of the bite.
Overall: Not negligent per se.
Does the court have supplemental jurisdiction over the new claim?
Yes, while this would bust diversity, this is only disqualifying if the plaintiff added the claim or the claim added a new plaintiff.
A farming company contracts with a retailer to deliver a shipment of lobsters. After finalizing the deal, a local strike temporarily makes the farm's go-to delivery company unable to perform any deliveries for the foreseeable future. The only other option is to work with the delivery company's rival, whose higher costs would mean the farm lost money on the lobster delivery.
The go-to delivery company told the farm that if they work with their rival during the strike, they will never deliver for them again. The farm obliges and repudiates the lobster contract. Can the farm rely on impossibility as a defense if sued by the retailer?
No, rise in costs does not excuse performance in goods contracts. The delivery company's ultimatum is an outside business threat and does not make performance impracticable.
The defendant still has the right to efficient breach if performing the contract is no longer financially viable.
John orders from Noah 100 pairs of binoculars for no particular reason, totaling to $6,000 in price. No written contract is formed. Before the goods are sent, John wires Noah the money. The next day, Noah ships the goods.
Between the money wire and beginning shipment, is there an enforceable contract?
Yes, goods already accepted or paid for are excepted from the Statute of Frauds, even if the contract would normally have to be in writing.
I keel over and die from a stroke caused by drinking my 10th Monster Energy in an hour. My family sues Monster for failing to place a warning that drinking too much could lead to injury or death.
Will Monster be liable for my death?
Yes, manufacturers are generally expected to know the risks of using the product. Unlike design defects, warning defects do not need to assume the product is being used as intended. The hindsight test indicates that excessively drinking Monster Energy is harmful and the manufacturer should have foreseen it.
A travelling carnival has an attraction that allows the general public to walk on a tightrope. The carnival uses a state-of-the-art harness that will catch a person if they slip from the rope. The rope is also only eight feet off the ground, which should not be fatal to anyone should they fall.
The carnival doesn't have a net for this attraction because they estimate that the harness should never break if maintained well, and the cost of maintaining the net would exceed the likelihood that someone would actually need it.
Regardless, one day a kid is walking the rope and slips at the very end. Because the harness was not put on correctly by staff, it slips off and he falls to the ground, breaking his arm and getting a severe concussion.
The family argues that if they had a smaller net only at the end of the tightrope, it would have caught their son and been less expensive to maintain than the injuries he suffered.
Based on this alternative conduct, did the carnival breach their duty to the child?
No. The alternative conduct is insufficient, since you cannot predict where the child would have fallen and putting a net at the end of the rope would not have helped if the child fell elsewhere.
1. Federal courts might mess up state law
2. The claim is primarily based on state law
3. All that remains in the case is non-diverse state law claims
4. This claim should generally not be in federal court
A power company enters an output contract with a coal mine, where the power company agrees to purchase all coal that the mine produces for a year. On average, the mine produces 30,000 tons of coal in a year.
In June, the mine caves in and all production is halted for the rest of the year. The mine had only produced 15,000 tons of coal, all of which was delivered and the mine timely informed the power company that it could not produce any more coal. In discovery, the mine admits it had not inspected its support structures for 18 months.
What would the power company have to prove to successfully show the mine breached its contract?
It would have to prove that a defect in the support structures caused the cave in and would have been discovered with regular inspection.
This would prove the mine was negligent leading to the event that caused impossibility, invalidating it as a defense.
Glue Corp buys $499 worth of horses from Horse Corp in an oral agreement. After contract formation, Glue Corp decides they want to double their production and asks over the phone to modify the contract to purchase $998 worth of horses. Horse Corp agrees.
If Horse Corp only sends $499 worth of horses and Glue Corp sues for the remaining amount, will they succeed?
No, modifications are treated as a standalone contract when determining if they need to be in writing. Because the modification brought the price above $500 but was an oral agreement, the Statute of Frauds would make the modified contract unenforceable and leave the original oral agreement standing.
What are the criteria for determining if a warning defect exists? (100pts per correct guess)
1. Explicitness
2. Comprehensibility
3. Clarity
4. Conspicuousness
5. Means used to warn
A 14-year-old is riding his bike at night without a light, in violation of a statute requiring all cyclists to have a light after dark.
The kid is hit by a car and is severely injured.
In the driver's defense, can the child's violation of a safety statute serve as proof that the child was negligent per se?
No. NPS does not apply to children (Bauman v. Crawford). It can be used as proof of general negligence, however.
Plaintiff (California) is suing Defendant (New York) under 1332. Defendant makes a cross-claim against a third party from Arizona also relating to the facts of the case. Amount in controversy is met in all instances.
Does the Court have jurisdiction under 1367?
No, cross-claims and counter claims under Rule 13 never go through 1367.
TBH I couldn't think of another hypo so just pick a number between 1-10.
9