Contract Law Cases

SwiftSetting avatar
SwiftSetting
·
·
Download

Start Quiz

Study Flashcards

10 Questions

What is the main idea in Lefkowitz v. General Minneapolis Surplus?

The court ruled in favor of Lefkowitz because the offer was clear, definite, and explicit.

What is the key principle in Hammer v. Sidway?

Consideration means that a party must abandon some legal right in the present.

What is the significance of the doctrine of promissory estoppel in Ricketts v. Scothern?

It allows the court to enforce a promise even if it is not supported by consideration.

What was the main issue in Sullivan v. O'Connor?

The plaintiff sued for breach of contract and malpractice, and the jury awarded damages for both.

What is the main difference between the U.S. and the U.K. in the case of Regina v. Dudley and Stephens?

In the U.S., necessity is a valid defense for murder, while in the U.K., it is not.

Why did the Court of Appeals object to the confessions and evidence obtained from Toy and Wong Sun?

Because the original arrest of Hom Way was without a warrant or probable cause.

Why did the parents of the three girls killed in the Ford Pinto case bring criminal charges against Ford?

Because they wanted to recover pain and suffering and punitive damages.

Why did the Supreme Court of Illinois rule in favor of Gambro in the Balla v. Gambro Inc. case?

Because Gambro had a right to discharge counsel for any reason.

What was the main issue in the Upjohn v. U.S. case?

Whether the Attorney-Client Privilege only applies to policy makers.

What was the outcome of the Wong Sun case?

Wong Sun's testimony was thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Study Notes

Lefkowitz v. General Minneapolis Surplus

  • Defendant advertised coats for $1.00 without disclosing a house rule that they would only sell to a woman.
  • The court ruled in favor of Lefkowitz, stating that the offer was clear, definite, and explicit.

Hammer v. Sidway

  • Uncle offered nephew $5,000 to refrain from bad behavior until 21 years old.
  • Consideration doesn't mean a party must benefit, but rather that the other party abandons some legal right in the present.

Ricketts v. Scothern

  • Grandfather promised granddaughter $2,000 with 6% interest to induce her not to work as a bookkeeper.
  • He paid interest for one year, and she got a job that he consented to.
  • The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff (Scothern) due to the doctrine of promissory estoppel.

Sullivan v. O'Connor

  • Plaintiff underwent three botched surgeries for a nose job.
  • Plaintiff sued for breach of contract and malpractice.
  • The jury threw out the malpractice claim, but awarded damages for:
    • Out-of-pocket expenses
    • Pain and suffering
    • Damages for loss of profession

Regina v. Dudley and Stephens

  • Dudley and Stephens were stranded at sea without food for 9 days and ate a crew boy.
  • The jury left the decision to the judge, who ruled that necessity is not enough to justify murder.
  • However, the judge recommended clemency.

Miranda v. Arizona

  • Miranda was questioned without knowledge of his rights and was arrested for kidnapping and rape.
  • The case raised questions about criminal rights and custody.

Turner Case

  • 7 people were indicted for kidnapping and rape.
  • The case involved the Brady claim, where the prosecutor didn't disclose the identities of McMillan and Luchie.

Batson v. Kentucky

  • A black man was tried by an all-white jury below the Dixon line.
  • The Supreme Court of Kentucky affirmed the conviction, stating that the defendant didn't make a prima facie case of discrimination.

Wong Sun v. U.S.

  • Hom Way was arrested after being surveilled for 6 weeks.
  • Agents found no heroin on his property, but he pointed them to Johnny Yee as a seller.
  • The Court of Appeals objected to the conviction, stating that the evidence was "fruit of the poisonous tree" because Hom Way was arrested without a warrant or probable cause.
  • The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that knowledge gained by the government's own wrong cannot be used.

Ford Pinto Case

  • A Chevrolet crashed into a Ford Pinto, killing three girls.
  • Indiana brought criminal charges against Ford for reckless design.
  • The case was criminal rather than civil because of a lack of suitable civil sanctions.

Balla v. Gambro Inc.

  • Balla, in-house counsel for Gambro, alerted the FDA to defective dialyzers from Germany.
  • Balla was fired and sued for $22 million in damages due to reputation loss.
  • The Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed the summary judgment for Gambro, stating that there is no reason to reward a lawyer for doing their duty.

Upjohn v. U.S.

  • In-house counsel sent a survey to employees on bribes to foreign officials.
  • The IRS subpoenaed the responses to the survey.
  • The court ruled that the surveys are covered by the work product doctrine and Attorney-Client Privilege.

This quiz covers famous contract law cases, including Lefkowitz v. General Minneapolis Surplus, Hammer v. Sidway, and Ricketts v. Scothern, with a focus on key concepts and rulings.

Make Your Own Quizzes and Flashcards

Convert your notes into interactive study material.

Get started for free

More Quizzes Like This

Use Quizgecko on...
Browser
Browser