Business Law Midterm
Midterm Responses
Question 1:
The issue here is whether Brian Logan was required to pay the $20 fee for the seminar to cover the cost of the handbook to Expert Investments Corp (EIC). Was an agreement ever made between the two parties (Brian and EIC)?
A contract requires 1) an agreement, 2) consideration, 3) legality, and 4) capacity. An agreement is made when there is an offer with the intent to be bound by the offer, reasonably definite terms, and communication of offer to offeree by offeror. The offer could be terminated either by revocation, rejection, expiration, or operation of law. Brian can argue that there was no agreement to begin with, and thus there was no contract. There was no offer made (the advertisement in the LA Times for the seminar was not an offer but an “invitation to negotiation”), and reasonably definite terms were not communicated to Brian before or during the seminar. The ad did not specify a fee for attendance, and since it was not made clear to Brian that the $20 fee was for attending the seminar or for the book, Brian shouldn’t have to pay the fee. EIC could argue that a contract need not be written in order to exist. EIC made a verbal offer when the representative announced the $20 fee. The terms were definite: $20 seminar fee to cover the cost of the handbook, and this was communicated between EIC and the attendees (including Brian). If Brian wanted to terminate the offer, he could’ve simply rejected the offer by returning the handbook. EIC could also argue that this was a quasi-contract, in which the EIC conferred some type of benefit to the attendees (a seminar to educate attendees on purchasing real estate), the attendees should’ve known they had to pay for it (surely an ad on the newspaper for such a helpful seminar could not be free), and it would be injustice to not pay for it (no other real estate company would offer its time and resources for free). The useful handbook provided helpful details for
Question 1:
The issue here is whether Brian Logan was required to pay the $20 fee for the seminar to cover the cost of the handbook to Expert Investments Corp (EIC). Was an agreement ever made between the two parties (Brian and EIC)?
A contract requires 1) an agreement, 2) consideration, 3) legality, and 4) capacity. An agreement is made when there is an offer with the intent to be bound by the offer, reasonably definite terms, and communication of offer to offeree by offeror. The offer could be terminated either by revocation, rejection, expiration, or operation of law. Brian can argue that there was no agreement to begin with, and thus there was no contract. There was no offer made (the advertisement in the LA Times for the seminar was not an offer but an “invitation to negotiation”), and reasonably definite terms were not communicated to Brian before or during the seminar. The ad did not specify a fee for attendance, and since it was not made clear to Brian that the $20 fee was for attending the seminar or for the book, Brian shouldn’t have to pay the fee. EIC could argue that a contract need not be written in order to exist. EIC made a verbal offer when the representative announced the $20 fee. The terms were definite: $20 seminar fee to cover the cost of the handbook, and this was communicated between EIC and the attendees (including Brian). If Brian wanted to terminate the offer, he could’ve simply rejected the offer by returning the handbook. EIC could also argue that this was a quasi-contract, in which the EIC conferred some type of benefit to the attendees (a seminar to educate attendees on purchasing real estate), the attendees should’ve known they had to pay for it (surely an ad on the newspaper for such a helpful seminar could not be free), and it would be injustice to not pay for it (no other real estate company would offer its time and resources for free). The useful handbook provided helpful details for