HEAD 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
Premium Contract
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Based on the Case Scenario: Theory to Practice scenario involving Big Time Toymaker (BTT)‚ a company that develops‚ manufactures‚ and distributes board games and other toys globally‚ entered into an agreement with Chou‚ an independent inventor of a new strategy game he name Strat‚ to distribute this new game. However‚ over more than a 90-day period‚ BTT reneged on the agreement and was in breach of contract stating BTT were no longer interested in distributing Chou’s
Premium
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
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
Big Time Toymaker Helen Latscha Elizabeth Martin John Hong David Cho LAW/421 Week 4 November 19‚ 2014 Dr. Mark Pugatch BS‚ MBA‚ JD Big Time Toymaker According to Melvin‚ 2011 “an agreement may result in a binding contract‚ whether it is an oral or written agreement between parties”. Big Time Toymaker (BTT) had shown interest in the new strategy game developed by Chou‚ called Strat. There were oral agreements for exclusive distribution rights‚ but had stipulations that it must be in writing. There
Premium Contract Common law Contract law
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker LAW/421 Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Big Time Toymaker (BTT) develops‚ manufactures‚ and distributes board games and other toys in North America‚ Chou is the inventor of a new strategy game he calls Strat. BTT had an interest in distributing Strat and entered into an agreement with Chou‚ offering him $25‚000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. This agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing
Premium
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Did the parties have a contract? If there was a contract between Big Time Toymaker (BTT) and Chou it was a bilateral contract that was binding when BTT (offeror) paid Chou (offeree) $25K in exchange for limited negotiation privileges for a 90-day period. Consequently‚ BTT bought the rights to negotiate the distribution agreements for Chou’s board game. A bilateral contract is an agreement of two promises and two performances. The
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
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
Week Four Individual Case Scenario LAW/421 March 14‚ 2013 Week Four Individual Case Scenario By studying the situation‚ I don’t believe the 2 sides concerned ever had a deal. In the situation‚ the sides reached a deal just 3 days ahead of the conclusion of a 90-day time frame set in the initial negotiation deal. In the initial negotiation deal‚ it says that there would be no distribution agreement until it was on paper. As soon as the BTT manager posted the e-mail to Chou‚ he described
Premium Contract