**** PLEASE FOLLOW THESE REQUIREMENTS**** IF THE STUDENT FAILS TO FOLLOW THE REQUIRMENTS, A ZERO WOULD BE ISSUED FOR THE ASSIGNMENT.
Answer these five questions using the IRAC method ( Issue, Rule, Analasyis, Conclusion)
The issue should be one sentence long and its going to be the question that you are being asked in the question.
The rule needs to be mentioned from the online textbook with the page number from where the rule was found. Any online resources ARE NOT ALLOWED!!
THE RULE SHOULD BE DERIVED FROM E-BOOK!!
Online E-BBOK LOG IN INFO IS :
www.cengage.com
Email: XXXXXXXXXX
Password: Mo.mo1999
This login will take you to the DIGITAL VERSION OF THE text book, you would need to find the rule from chapters 15 and 16.
The analysis should be one paragarph long describing the rule and the facts and how to reach the conclusion.
The conlcusion should be one sentence long to answer the question that is asked.
ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS USING IRAC METHOD! NO OUTSIDE SOURCES ARE ALLOWED!!
1. Duress.
In 2005, Salser Granite Co. hired Da
yl Leiberger under an employment contract that
stated he was entitled to six months’ severance pay if he was laid off. The company would not
have to pay in the event of any voluntary separation or involuntary termination for other reasons,
such as for poor performance or for cause. In mid-2006, Leiberger was asked to resign afte
having an affair with the CEO’s executive secretary. Leiberger was told that if he did not resign,
he would be fired for violating company policies, but that if he did resign the company would
keep him on the payroll for another six weeks. Leiberger resigned and signed an agreement
eleasing Salser Granite from any liability for
each of the employment contract. Leiberger late
claimed that he had signed the release under duress and sued Salser Granite for the six months'
severance pay under his employment contract. Discuss whether Leiberger's claim for duress
should succeed.
2. Fraudulent Misrepresentation.
Youser Yu was violently assaulted and ro
ed in the parking
structure of his apartment complex after stepping out of his car one night. The perpetrators were
not tenants of the complex. They were third parties who were not connected to any tenants. He
later learned from the police that they were frequently called to the premises by other tenants fo
suspicious activities and noise distu
ances. But no a
ests were ever made by the police. Yu had
een living in the apartment for almost a year and did not notice any trouble before this incident
occu
ed. He sued the landlord and the property management company for inducing him to ente
into a 2-year lease based on false statements made by the manager that the apartment complex
was safe and crime free. Yu previously lived in a crime ridden neighborhood and wanted to
move into another safe place. He claimed that had it not been for manager’s representation
egarding the safety of the premises, he would not have signed the 2-year lease. The defendants
claimed the manager’s statements were opinion and not fact. They also argued that the crimes
(assault and ro
ery) were done by third parties whom they had no control over. Would Yu
succeed in his claim for fraudulent misrepresentation against defendants?
3. Statute of Frauds.
Mila Chen orally contracted with Park Construction, Inc. to completely
emodel her 1800 sq ft home. She wanted to turn her 1920s craftsman bungalow into a modern
house with a new kitchen, bathroom, flooring, siding, roof and more. Chen told Jin Park, owne
of Park Construction, that she did not expect the remodeling project to complete within a year.
Park explained to Chen that he could easily finish the remodeling in a few months if she could
afford it. Chen stated that she did not think her finances would allow for completion within a
year, although she prefe
ed to have it completed sooner than later. They agreed that Park
Construction would work on one part of the house at a time until the entire house was finished
and that time was not of the essence. The construction was scheduled to start a month after they
entered into the oral contract. Park Construction never showed up to the job site on the scheduled
start date. It turned out that Park Construction recently contracted with a residential developer to
tear down old apartments and build new condos in their place. Chen sued Park Construction fo
each of contract. Park Construction claimed they did not have a contract and, if they did, the
contract was unenforceable. Is Park Construction co
ect?
4. Statute of Frauds.
The plaintiff, Palank, formed an oral agreement with the defendant,
Dowser, to buy several pounds of rare mushrooms worth over $2,000. Afterward, Dowser wrote
a memorandum concerning the agreement and all its terms for his own records and put it in his
safe. The memo, which Dowser did not sign, was created on Dowser's letterhead (which is a
sufficient signing in the eyes of the court) and contained Palank's name in the text. Subsequently,
Dowser wrote a letter to Palank stating he was not going to sell Palank the mushrooms as agreed.
When Palank sued Dowser in a Maryland state court for
each of contract, Dowser used the
Statute of Frauds as a defense. Palank claimed that Dowser's memo (even if it was neve
delivered to Palank), combined with the subsequent letter, satisfied the writing requirement of
the Statute of Frauds. Is Palank co
ect? Does the memo written by Dowser satisfy the writing
equirement under the Statute of Frauds? Discuss.
5. Parol Evidence.
A 1965 bargaining agreement between employees and Charter Corp. clearly
stated that the company would pay the cost of health insurance for employees who had retired
prior to 1959. Later bargaining agreements, the last of which expired in 1988 when the plant at
which the employees worked was closed, also indicated that once employees reach the age of
sixty-five, Charter would pay for their health insurance and that when they die, their spouses
would continue to receive supplemental health benefits at the company's cost. Charter withdrew
the health benefits of retired employees in 1988, when it closed its plant and the last agreement
expired. Mitt Cole and other retired employees sued the company to have their health benefits
einstated. The employees asserted that the agreements meant that they would be granted benefits
for life. Charter contended that the agreements granted benefits only for years—during the
duration of the agreements. The court was left to decide whether extrinsic evidence (including
letters from the company to retirees indicating that the company would pay the cost of the health
insurance throughout the retirees' lives) was admissible to clarify terms of the contract. Should
the court allow the employees to introduce extrinsic evidence to justify their claim? Discuss
fully.