mgmt 59 7
Business Law
MGMT597
Week Two Homework Problems:
14.2. The Sacketts win. The Statute of Frauds provides that oral contracts for the sale of land are invalid unless in writing. Where, however, the party seeking to enforce the conveyance has partially performed the contract, so as to render recession inequitable and unjust, the contract may be outside of the statute. Thus, where it appears that a vendee has taken continuous and exclusive possession under the contract and has made improvements, or where other equitable considerations are present, specific performance will be granted. Among the relevant equitable considerations that may justify specific performance, a court will consider the amount of time that has passed before the vendee’s possession was challenged. This factor is considered because it would be inequitable to aid one who induced another’s detrimental reliance by his failure to promptly pursue his rights. In this case, during the 14 years the Sacketts inhabited the home on Orchard Drive, Robert Briggs never visited, sought rent, checked on the condition of the home, or otherwise asserted any interest in the property. Under these circumstances, the court agreed with the lower court that there was sufficient evidence of part performance of the oral contract to render it specifically enforceable. Thus, the judgment in favor of the Sacketts was affirmed. Briggs v. Sackett, 418 A.2d 586, 1980 Pa. Super. Lexis 2034 (Pa.App.)
16.10. Yes, an order of specific performance is an appropriate remedy in this case. Specific performance may be decreed where the goods are unique or in other circumstances where money damages do not adequately compensate the plaintiff. In this case, the court found that the uniqueness of Claiborne’s cosmetics line, including its distinctive package, is obvious. Moreover, the court found that money damages would not adequately compensate Claiborne for such intangibles as how the destruction of the Claiborne
MGMT597
Week Two Homework Problems:
14.2. The Sacketts win. The Statute of Frauds provides that oral contracts for the sale of land are invalid unless in writing. Where, however, the party seeking to enforce the conveyance has partially performed the contract, so as to render recession inequitable and unjust, the contract may be outside of the statute. Thus, where it appears that a vendee has taken continuous and exclusive possession under the contract and has made improvements, or where other equitable considerations are present, specific performance will be granted. Among the relevant equitable considerations that may justify specific performance, a court will consider the amount of time that has passed before the vendee’s possession was challenged. This factor is considered because it would be inequitable to aid one who induced another’s detrimental reliance by his failure to promptly pursue his rights. In this case, during the 14 years the Sacketts inhabited the home on Orchard Drive, Robert Briggs never visited, sought rent, checked on the condition of the home, or otherwise asserted any interest in the property. Under these circumstances, the court agreed with the lower court that there was sufficient evidence of part performance of the oral contract to render it specifically enforceable. Thus, the judgment in favor of the Sacketts was affirmed. Briggs v. Sackett, 418 A.2d 586, 1980 Pa. Super. Lexis 2034 (Pa.App.)
16.10. Yes, an order of specific performance is an appropriate remedy in this case. Specific performance may be decreed where the goods are unique or in other circumstances where money damages do not adequately compensate the plaintiff. In this case, the court found that the uniqueness of Claiborne’s cosmetics line, including its distinctive package, is obvious. Moreover, the court found that money damages would not adequately compensate Claiborne for such intangibles as how the destruction of the Claiborne