law421 week 3
Abstract
“Theory to Practice” scenario: Big Time Toymaker
Big Time Toymaker (BTT) develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys to the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
Chou is the inventor of a new strategy game he named Strat. BTT was interested in distributing Strat and entered into an agreement with Chou whereby BTT paid him $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. The exclusive negotiation agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing.
Just three days before the expiration of the 90-day period, the parties reached an oral distribution agreement at a meeting. Chou offered to draft the contract that would memorialize their agreement. Before Chou drafted the agreement, a BTT manager sent Chou an e-mail with the subject line “Strat Deal” that repeated the key terms of the distribution agreement including price, time frames, and obligations of both parties. Although the e-mail never used the word contract, it stated that all of the terms had been agreed upon.
Chou believed that this e-mail was meant to replace the earlier notion that he should draft a contract, and one month passed. BTT then sent Chou a fax requesting that he send a draft for a distribution agreement contract. Despite the fact that Chou did so immediately after receiving the BTT fax, several more months passed without response from BTT.
BTT had a change in management and informed Chou they were not interested in distributing Strat.
BTT Theory To Practice In common law legal systems a contract is a agreement in which parties into it voluntarily, each of whom intend to create one of more legal obligations. The elements are that there is a offer and a acceptance, proof of these can be in writing or orally by conduct. I believe they had a verbal agreement from the beggining once Chou was paid the $25,000.00 for the exclusive negotiation rights, after the 90 days, I believe there was a
“Theory to Practice” scenario: Big Time Toymaker
Big Time Toymaker (BTT) develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys to the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
Chou is the inventor of a new strategy game he named Strat. BTT was interested in distributing Strat and entered into an agreement with Chou whereby BTT paid him $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. The exclusive negotiation agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing.
Just three days before the expiration of the 90-day period, the parties reached an oral distribution agreement at a meeting. Chou offered to draft the contract that would memorialize their agreement. Before Chou drafted the agreement, a BTT manager sent Chou an e-mail with the subject line “Strat Deal” that repeated the key terms of the distribution agreement including price, time frames, and obligations of both parties. Although the e-mail never used the word contract, it stated that all of the terms had been agreed upon.
Chou believed that this e-mail was meant to replace the earlier notion that he should draft a contract, and one month passed. BTT then sent Chou a fax requesting that he send a draft for a distribution agreement contract. Despite the fact that Chou did so immediately after receiving the BTT fax, several more months passed without response from BTT.
BTT had a change in management and informed Chou they were not interested in distributing Strat.
BTT Theory To Practice In common law legal systems a contract is a agreement in which parties into it voluntarily, each of whom intend to create one of more legal obligations. The elements are that there is a offer and a acceptance, proof of these can be in writing or orally by conduct. I believe they had a verbal agreement from the beggining once Chou was paid the $25,000.00 for the exclusive negotiation rights, after the 90 days, I believe there was a