Questions of Fundamentals of Business Law LAW 1101
On April 15, John, an adult, orally agreed to sell his music equipment to Paul, a 17-year-old, for $800 cash upon delivery. John did not know Paul’s age and did not ask about it. On April 20, John delivered the equipment to Paul’s house. Paul refused to pay for the equipment. John sued Paul for the $800. Judgment for whom? Explain.
Drew, in attempting to sell his car to Brady, stated that:
1. he (Drew) was the original owner
2. the car was worth at least $12,000
3. the car just got a new engine a few months before Drew’s discussion with Brady.
Actually, as Drew was fully aware, Drew was not the original owner, the car was actually worth $9,000, and the engine was the same engine as the one car had when he purchased it. Brady knew that Drew was not the original owner and ended up buying the car for $10,000. Brady liked that the car had a new engine. A few months after purchasing the car, the engine stopped working and Brady had to pay $2,500 for a new engine. Brady immediately commenced an action against Drew claiming that each of the three statements made by Drew constituted fraud.
Judgment for whom and what remedies, if any? Explain. In your answer explain why each statement does or does not constitute fraud and how damages, if any, would be computed.
On January 18th, Donald, a wholesaler of ties, entered into two oral agreements with Joe, a famous clothing designer and manufacturer. The first agreement provided that Joe was to sell to Donald, a thousand ties, which Joe had in stock, for $20,000, payment and delivery to be on February 18th at Donald’s place of business. The second agreement provided that for the next two years, Joe would work for Donald to design for Donald, all of Donald’s line of ties to be manufactured by Donald, at an annual salary to Joe of $150,000. The parties also agreed that if Joe ever quit his contract, for Donald in the two years, Donald, Joe had to pay Donald, $50,000.
On February 1, Joe received from Donald, a written confirmation of their two oral agreements signed by Donald together with Donald’s check for $25,000 as an advance against Joe’s first year’s salary as a designer. Joe promptly deposited the check in his account.
On February 15, 2020, Joe changed his mind about the two agreements and informed Donald that he refused to perform either one and that he was keeping the $25,000 as compensation for the time he had spent negotiating the agreements and thinking about possible designs.
Donald now sues Joe for breach of contract. Joe pleads the statute of frauds as his defense. Judgment for whom?
(a) On the first agreement? Explain.
(b) On the second agreement? Explain.
(c) Assuming that the employment contract is valid, and Joe fails to work for Donald for two year, how much does Joe owe Donald? Explain.
On March 1, Andy, the owner of a shoe store, received the following letter dated February 25, from Nathan, a discount wholesale distributor of shoes: “I will sell you 100 sneakers for the total price of $5,000, payment and delivery on November 1. This offer is firm until April 30th. (signed) Nathan”.
On April 20th, Andy received a second letter from Nathan stating: “I withdraw my previous offer to sell you the shoes. (signed) Nathan”.
On April 30th, Andy sent the following letter to Nathan: “I accept your March 1st offer regarding the shoes”. Due to a delay in postal service, this letter was not received at Nathan’s place of business until May 5th.
On May 4th, Nathan’ wife telephoned Andy and told Andy that Nathan had died on May1st and that she (Nathan’ widow and sole beneficiary) had sold Nathan’ business and the entire inventory of shoes to a third party.
On May 5th, Andy commenced an action against the estate of Nathan to recover damages for breach of contract.
Judgment for whom? Explain.
Upon graduating Baruch College, a CEO of a high-tech company, called Swoosh, reaches out to you, and says that she wants to hire you as a consultant to allow her to understand what kind of company new college graduates want to work at, so that she can hire younger employees. The CEO tells you that she wants this company to be a popular name-brand with a distinctive logo. As such, she wants to hire you, as an outside consultant. Using what you have learned about employee discrimination, intellectual property, and business ethics, in 500 words or less, advise on her the following issues:
- How do you recommend that the CEO can brand her company in a distinctive way? What should the CEO be wary of?
- Do you have any recommendations or warnings for the CEO regarding focusing on hiring younger people?
- Should Swoosh engage in corporate social responsibility? Explain what that means, and why or why not?