Contract Law Cases
10 Questions
0 Views

Choose a study mode

Play Quiz
Study Flashcards
Spaced Repetition
Chat to lesson

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

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

  • The court ruled that the defendant's house rule was illegal and ordered compensation.
  • The court ruled against the defendant for discriminatory advertising practices.
  • The court ruled in favor of Lefkowitz because the offer was clear, definite, and explicit. (correct)
  • The court ruled that the plaintiff's claim was invalid due to lack of consideration.

    • What is the key principle in Hammer v. Sidway?

  • The court may not enforce an agreement that is deemed unfair.
  • Consideration means that a party must abandon some legal right in the present. (correct)
  • Consideration requires a party to benefit directly from the agreement.
  • Doctrine of promissory estoppel

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

  • It is a principle that only applies to promises made by family members.
  • It makes a promise enforceable only if it is in writing.
  • It allows the court to enforce a promise even if it is not supported by consideration. (correct)
  • It requires a party to prove damages before a promise can be enforced.

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

    <p>The plaintiff sued for breach of contract and malpractice, and the jury awarded damages for both.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

    <p>In the U.S., necessity is a valid defense for murder, while in the U.K., it is not.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

    <p>Because the original arrest of Hom Way was without a warrant or probable cause.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

    <p>Because they wanted to recover pain and suffering and punitive damages.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

    <p>Because Gambro had a right to discharge counsel for any reason.</p> Signup and view all the answers

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

    <p>Whether the Attorney-Client Privilege only applies to policy makers.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What was the outcome of the Wong Sun case?

    <p>Wong Sun's testimony was thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    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.

    Studying That Suits You

    Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

    Quiz Team

    Description

    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.

    More Like This

    Use Quizgecko on...
    Browser
    Open
    Browser
    Browser