Big Time Toymaker Deborah Daka Law/421 November 24‚ 2014 Charles Hughes Big Time Toymaker “According to the Legal Environment of Business 1e Chapter 6: “1. At what point‚ if ever‚ did the parties have a contract?” In this scenario‚ it stated no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. (Sean P. Melvin‚ 2011‚ p. 155). “2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract?” (Sean P. Melvin‚ 2011‚ p. 155). Factors
Premium Contract
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker This scenario deals with Big Time Toymaker and a contract they were negotiating with Chou‚ the inventor of a new strategy game that BTT wanted exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. When Chou received an email with the details of what they were going to agree upon‚ he thought that was the contract and did not proceed in drawing up a contract himself. Months passed and when BTT changed management‚ they informed Chou that they were not interested in distributing
Premium Contract
Big Time Toymaker Carlos Medrano LAW/421 November 19‚ 2014 Alice King 1. At what point‚ if ever‚ did the parties have a contract? The parties had a contract when they spoke of and agreed on the deal that was later followed up by a BTT manager via email. Which included full details of prices‚ time frames and obligations of both parties. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? The facts that weigh in favor of
Premium Contract Contract law Gentlemen's agreement
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker LaTanga Washington Law/421 January 28‚ 2013 Dr. Thomas Wilson Abstract Big Time Toymaker a developer manufacturer and distributor of board games and toys recently collaborated with and an inventor named Chou. Chou invented a strategy game called Strat‚ which requires a distributor. Chou entered into an agreement with Big Time for $25.000 and in return‚ Chou granted Big Time the exclusive negotiation rights for 90 days. During that time‚ Big Time honored the
Premium Contract
Big Time Toymaker Scenario LAW/421 Big Time Toymaker Scenario In chapter six of The Legal Environment of Business: A Managerial Approach: Theory to Practice‚ Melvin presents the case scenario of Big Time Toymaker (BTT) and Chou the game inventor. In the scenario‚ Chou invents a strategy game titled Strat. The scenario follows the events as BTT and Chou negotiate the potential distribution of Strat‚ ending with BTT declining to distribute the game. The legal issues presented are as follows:
Premium Contract
Big Time Toymaker LAW/421 May 20‚ 2014 Aileen S. Azadian Question 1 At what point‚ if ever‚ did the parties have a contract? Answer: Big Time Toymaker and Chou had an oral contract. In a meeting that included Big Time Toymaker and Chou an agreement was reached. Additionally‚ an e-mail was sent by Big Time Toymaker to Chou that confirmed the terms of the agreement that were discussed during the meeting. Question 2 What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’
Premium Contract Communication
Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point‚ if ever‚ did the parties have a contract? According to the scenario‚ both Big Time Toymaker and Chou did partake in an oral contract. During the meeting both parties reached an oral distribution agreement‚ and a confirmation of the terms of the agreement was sent by e-mail. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? The facts in favor of Chou would oral agreement and email he received from
Premium Contract
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Rhonda Burrows Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker We were asked to answer questions one through six based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section‚ and to include the following in our response: 1. At what point‚ if ever‚ did the parties have a contract? My Answer: When both parties agreed Big Time Toymaker (BTT) and Chou agreed to the terms‚ obligations‚ which covered intent‚ and followed through when BTT paid Chou $25‚000 in exchange for exclusive
Premium Contract Marketing Common law
Big Time Toymaker Scenario Angela Brinnen LAW 421 August 4‚ 2014 Barry Preston Big Time Toymaker Scenario At what point‚ if ever‚ did the parties have a contract? After carefully reviewing all of the information about the case of Big Time Toymaker (BTT) and Chou‚ I have found that there were two different contracts in place. In the text it describes a contract as “a promise or set of promises enforceable by law” (Melvin‚ 2014)‚ these contracts can be oral or written. The first contract in place is
Premium Contract Contract law Common law
Any contract for the sale of goods that exceeds $500 falls under the statute of frauds and must be in writing to constitute an enforceable contract. The contract between Tidwell and Anthony amounts to $50‚000 and must be in writing to be enforceable‚ which presents the first issue in this problem. There are‚ however‚ alternative means of satisfying the Statute of Frauds. In this case‚ Tidwell provided Anthony with a good faith payment of $10‚000 when the oral contract was entered into on June
Premium Contract Contract law