CONTRACTS-CHARITABLE SUBSCRIPTIONS-IOWA SUPREMIE COURT
|
|
- Egbert Elijah Hunter
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 CONTRACTS-CHARITABLE SUBSCRIPTIONS-IOWA SUPREMIE COURT FINDS SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT BINDING WTHOUT SHOWING- OF CONSIDERATION OR DETRIMENTAL RELIANCE_Saisbury v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 221 N.W.2d 609 (Iowa 1974). The enforcement of charitable subscriptions' has long presented a dilemma for the courts. Courts have shown a strong desire to enforce subscription agreements for public policy reasons, 2 but have been faced with a lack of adequate legal theories on which to do so. 8 Thus, some of the earlier American cases flatly refused to enforce charitable subscriptions and held that such agreements were strictly gratuitous. 4 However, most courts have subsequently decided that charitable subscriptions are enforceable, using one of several tenuous theories of consideration or promissory estoppel as a legal basis. 5 A solution to this dilemma has been offered by the Iowa Supreme Court in Salsbury v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 6 with the holding that charitable subscriptions are enforceable without any showing of consideration or detrimental reliance. 7 Although a few lower courts have so held, 8 the Iowa court appears to be the first state high court to take this position. FACTS AND HOLDING The Salsbury case is the third subscription case to reach the Iowa Supreme Court involving the unsuccessful attempt to establish a college at Charles City, Iowa. 9 In the first two cases, sub- 1. A charitable subscription may be defined as an agreement executed by a donor whereby he promises, pledges or states an intention to give an amount of money or property to a religious, educational or other charitable organization. 2. See note 21 infra. 3. See notes and infra and accompanying text. 4. See Phillips Limerick Academy v. Davis, 11 Mass. 113 (1814); Boutell v. Cowdin, 9 Mass. 254 (1812). 5. See notes and infra and accompanying text N.W.2d 609 (Iowa 1974) [hereinafter cited as Salsbury]. 7. Id. at More Game Birds in Am. v. Boettger, 125 N.J.L. 97, 14 A.2d 778 (1940) (although sufficient consideration present, promise could be enforced on a public policy basis alone); Caul v. Gibson, 3 Pa. 416 (1846) (moral obligation sufficient consideration to support an express promise); Billig, The Problem of Consideration in Charitable Subscriptions, 12 CoR- NELL L.Q. 467, n.51 (1927) [hereinafter cited as Billig]; 29 GEORGE- TOWN L.J. 245, (1940). 9. The two earlier cases were Pappas v. Bever, 219 N.W.2d 720 (Iowa
2 19751 CASE NOTES scribers signed pledge forms indicating their intent to subscribe a certain dollar amount to the college fund. 10 After the college closed for lack of funds, its receiver brought actions against the above subscribers to collect on the unfulfilled pledges." In both cases the supreme court held that the pledges were not enforceable since the use of the word "intend" in the pledge form indicated that the pledges were not meant to be legally binding. 1 2 In the Salsbury case the subscriber did not use the standard pledge form, but instead wrote a letter to the fund raiser as follows: This is to advise you that the contribution from Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. to the Charles City College has been approved by Mr. E. A. McDaniel, District Manager, Mason City. The $15,000 contribution will be made over a three year period, in three equal payments. Our first $5,000 payment will be made in We are very pleased to add our name to the list of contributors to this fine community undertaking. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.' 8 The supreme court upheld the trial court's determination that the letter set its own terms and that it was not subject to the same defenses as the pledge cards.' 4 It also upheld the lower court's exclusion of evidence of circumstances extrinsic to the execution of pledge cards indicating that they were not binding.' 5 Thus, the language of the letter stating that "[tfhe $15,000 contribution will be made..." was interpreted as an unconditional promise to pay 1974) [hereinafter cited as Bever] and Pappas v. Hauser, 197 N.W.2d 607 (Iowa 1972) [hereinafter cited as Hauser]. 10. Bever at 721; Hauser at 609. The printed pledge form read: I/we intend to subscribe to the College Founder's Fund the sum of Dollars. I intend to pay [ Monthly [] Quarterly [] Semi-Annually [ ]Annually over 36 months beginning or as follows: 11. Bever at 721; Hauser at In Hauser, the court felt that the word "intend" made the language of the pledge form sufficiently uncertain to warrant the admission of parol evidence. This evidence revealed statements made by a fund raiser to the subscriber that the pledge could be disregarded if the subscriber died or had financial reverses or if the college failed. From these statements the court concluded that the signed pledge was not meant to be legally obligatory since only an "intention" to give was stated, and not a promise. Hauser at In Bever, the court arrived at the same conclusion but without considering the use of parol evidence. Bever at Salsbury at Id. at Id.
3 CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW [Vol. 8 a certain amount of money to the college and provided a basis for contractual liability. 16 The court then considered defendant's contention that there was no consideration for its promise since the college had failed before any payments were due. 17 The court reviewed its theory of consideration used in earlier subscription cases and acknolwedged that the criticism aimed at this and other theories was valid.' 8 It noted that a number of courts had responded to this criticism by substituting promissory estoppel for the consideration requirement, but decided not to follow this trend, contemplating that its adoption would result in fewer enforceable subscriptions due to the requirement that plaintiff must prove reliance. 19 The court then turned to Section 90, subsection (2), of the Restatement Second of the Law of Contracts and adopted it in conjunction with Section 90, subsection (1). Section 90 reads as follows: (1) A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee or a third person and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise. The remedy granted for breach may be limited as justice requires. (2) A charitable subscription or a marriage settlement is binding under Subsection (1) without proof that the promise induced action or forbearance. 20 The court indicated that it felt this rule was supported by public policy and that it was logical to find charitable subscriptions binding without a showing of consideration or detrimental reliance Id. at The author of the letter was an office manager for Northwestern Bell Telephone Company in Charles City and had also been active himself in the fund raising campaign. As a fund raiser he had been given pledge forms identical to those used in the Bever and Hauser cases but apparently did not have any available when the company's management authorized the pledge. The court's opinion implies that if the letter had contained language similar to that used in the printed forms the pledge would not have been binding. Id. at Id. at Id. at 612. See text accompanying notes infra for discussion of the theories and their criticisms. 19. Salisbury at See note 20 infra for explanation of promissory estoppel and its relationship to the rule adopted by the court. 20. Salsbury at 613, quoting RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS 90 (Tent. Drafts Nos. 1-7, 1973). Subsection (1) of this section is commonly known as promissory estoppel. J. CALAMARI & J. PERILLO, HANDBOOK OF of THE LAw OF CONTRACTS 99 (1970) [hereinafter cited as CALAMARi & PERmLO]. In order to hold a promise binding under this doctrine a court would require proof that the promisor made a promise likely to induce reliance and that the charity did in fact rely on it. The addition of subsection (2) eliminates this need for proof of actual reliance. 21. Id. at 613. The court's reference to public policy reflects a prey-
4 1975] CASE NOTES 851 In closing, it clarified its position by explaining that the enforceability of any pledge would still depend on the language of the pledge agreement. 22 If the language indicated that the pledge was not to be binding, the pledge would not be enforced; 23 if the subscription language was unequivocal, however, as in the letter in the principal case, it would be enforced. 24 PRIOR THEORIES FOR ENFORCEMENT OF PLEDGES As the court noted, enforcement of charitable subscriptions has quite often been based on tenuous theories of consideration. 25 In attempting to find consideration to support charitable subscriptions, courts have usually relied on one of three basic theories. 26 Perhaps alent judicial attitude that it is desirable to enforce charitable subscriptions whenever possible because charities perform acts of great benefit to society and because they are financially dependent on such pledges and gifts. See, e.g., Irwin v. Lombard Univ., 56 Ohio St. 9, -, 46 N.E. 63, 65 (1897), where the court said: The general course of decisions is favorable to the binding obligation of such promises. They have been influenced, not only by such reasons as those already stated, but in some cases, at least, by state policy as indicated by constitutional and statutory provisions. The policy of this state, as so indicated, is promotive of education, religion, and philanthropy. In addition to the declarations of the constitution upon the subject, the policy of the state is indicated by numerous legislative enactments providing for the incorporation of colleges, churches, and other institutions of philanthrophy, which are intended to be perpetual, and which, not only for their establishment, but for their perpetual maintenance, are authorized to receive contributions from those who are in sympathy with their purposes and methods,-the only source from which, in view of their nature, their support can be derived. Looking to the plainly declared purpose of the lawmaking department, promises made with a view to discharging the debts of such institutions, to providing the means for the employment of teachers, to establishing endowment funds to give them greater stability and efficiency, and whatever may be necessary or helpful to accomplish their purposes or secure their permanency, must be held valid... The Iowa Supreme Court adopted this language in Brokaw v. McElroy, 162 Iowa 288, , 143 N.W. 1087, 1090 (1913). 22. Salsbury at Id. Such language was used in the pledge forms of the Hauser and Bever cases. See note 10 supra. 24. Id. 25. CALAMARI & PFRLLO 103, at 177 (1970); 1A CORBIN ON CONTRACTS 198, at 204 (1963) [hereinafter cited as CORBIN]; 1 WILLISTON, CONTRACTS 116, at 474 (3d ed. 1957) [hereinafter cited as WILLISTON]; RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS 90, comment f, at 219; Billig, supra note 8, at 479; 26 BAYLOR L. REV. 256 (1974); 34 HARV. L. REv. 220 (1920); 15 HARV. L. REV. 312 (1901); 13 IowA L. REv. 332 (1928); 23 MICH. L. REV. 910 (1925); 22 MICH. L. REv. 260 (1924); 62 U. PA. L. REV. 296 (1914). 26. See CALAMARI & PERILLO 103; IA CORBIN 198; 1 WILLISTON 116; Annots., 151 A.L.R (1944), 115 A.L.R. 589 (1938), 95 A.L.R (1935), 38 A.L.R. 868 (1925),; 11 VA.'L. REv. 643 (1925). See generally 73
5 CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW [Vol. 8 the rule most often recited is that a subscription is an offer which is accepted and becomes enforceable when the promisee incurs expenses or obligations in reliance on the promise. 27 The incurring of expenses here is the consideration used to support the promise to pay the subscription. This theory has been criticized because in the typical subscription agreement the donor has no idea that he is bargaining for consideration, but only considers his action a gift. 28 Another accepted theory is that the promises of subscribers provide consideration for each other. 29 Under this theory the courts find that the subscription agreement is a contract with other subscribers, with the charity a beneficiary. 0 The main criticism of this has been that it is not factually realistic because in most charitable subscription situations the donors make promises not to each other but directly to the charity. 8 ' Furthermore, if other subscriptions serve as an inducement to the donor, they only affect his motive and are not actually given in exchange for his promise. 8 2 A third theory of consideration relied on is that the promisee, by accepting the subscription, impliedly makes a return promise to AM. JuR. 2d Subscriptions 9-13 (1974); 83 C.J.S. Subscriptions 5 (1953); cases cited in notes 27, 29 and 33 infra A CoRnI 198, at ; 1 WILLISTON 116, at ; Annot., 38 A.L.R. 868, 881 (1925). See Commissioner v. Bryn Maur Trust Co., 87 F.2d 607 (3d Cir. 1936); Trustees of Baker Univ. v. Clelland, 86 F.2d 14 (8th Cir. 1936); Brokaw v. McElroy, 162 Iowa 288, 143 N.W (1913); American Life Ins. Co. v. Melcher, 132 Iowa 324, 109 N.W. 805 (1906); First M.E. Church v. Donnell, 110 Iowa 5, 81 N.W. 171 (1899); Cottage Hosp. v. Merrill, 92 Iowa 649, 61 N.W (1894); McCabe v. O'Connor, 69 Iowa 134, 28 N.W. 573 (1886); University of Des Moines v. Livingston, 65 Iowa 202, 21 N.W. 564 (1884); McDonald v. Gray, 11 Iowa 508 (1861); Albert Lea College v. Brown's Estate, 88 Minn. 524, 93 N.W. 672 (1903); In re Field's Will, 15 Misc. 2d 950, 181 N.Y.S.2d 922 (Sur. Ct. 1959); I. & I. Holding Corp. v. Gainsburg, 276 N.Y. 427, _, 12 N.E.2d 532, (1938); Furman Univ. v. Waller, 124 S.C. 68, 117 S.E. 356 (1923). 28. CALAMARI & PERILLO 103, at 177; 1 WILLISTON 116, at 476; Billig, supra note 8, at CALAMARI & PERILLO 103, at 177; 1A CORBIN 198, at 210; 1 WIL- LISTON 116, at 476; Annot., 38 A.L.R. 868, 906 (1927). See Brokaw v. Mc- Elroy, 162 Iowa 288, , 143 N.W. 1087, (1913); Board of Trustees of Upper Iowa Conference of M.E. Church v. Noyes, 165 Iowa 601; 146 N.W. 848 (1914); Furman Univ. v. Waller, 124 S.C. 68, 117 S.E. 356 (1923). This was the consideration the Iowa court referred to in Salsbury in its discussion of theories used to enforce charitable subscriptions. Salsbury at A CoRBIN 198, at 210; Billig, supra note 8, at A CORBIN 198, at ; 1 WILLISTON 116, at ; Billig, supra note 8, at CALAMARI & PEmLLO 103, at 177; 1 WILLISTON 116, at
6 1975] CASE NOTES 853 apply the funds in conformity with the subscription agreement. 88 However, it has been pointed out that the trustee or fund raiser who accepts subscriptions on behalf of a charity is required by law to apply these funds to the purposes of the charity. 34 Thus, his implied reciprocal promise can hardly be considered as having been made in exchange for the donor's promise. 8 5 It should be noted that throughout many of these decisions the courts have intimated that charities and other organizations dependent on contributions should be given a special status when it comes to contract theories. 36 Courts have at times expressly recognized that the consideration they were finding to support the subscription would not be sufficient in an ordinary business setting. 8 " Also, considerable fear has been expressed that if subscriptions were not held binding many charities would fail for a want of funds. 8 These statements have led several writers to suggest that 33. CALAMARI & PERILLO 103, at 177; 1 WILLISTON 116, at 478; Billig, supra note 8, at 476. See In re Couch's Estate, 170 Neb. 518, 103 N.W.2d 274 (1960); In re Griswold's Estate, 113 Neb. 256, 202 N.W. 609 (1925); Allegheny College v. National Chautauqua City Bank, 246 N.Y. 369, 159 N.E. 173 (1927); Furman Univ. v. Waller, 124 S.C. 68, 117 S.E. 356 (1923). This approach was followed by the Nebraska court in In re Couch's Estate, supra, and In re Griswold's Estate, supra, which appear to be the only Nebraska cases dealing with the issue of consideration in relation to charitable subscriptions. 34. CALAMARI & PERILLO 103, at 177; Billig, supra note 8, at WILLISTON 116, at See, e.g., Barnes v. Perine, 12 N.Y. (2 Kern.) 18, 24, 3 N.Y. Ct. App. R. 172, (1854), where it is stated: The general principle is recognized in every case, that all simple contracts executory, whether in writing or verbal, must be founded upon a good consideration, and that the want of a legally adequate consideration, that is, a consideration recognized as sufficient in law, will vitiate every executory contract not under seal; still, the objection of a want of consideration for promises like the one before us has not always been regarded with favor; and judges, considering defenses of that character as breaches of faith toward the public, and especially toward those engaged in the same enterprise, and an unwarrantable disappointment of the reasonable expectations of those interested, have been willing, nay apparently anxious to discover a consideration which would uphold the undertaking as a valid contract; and it is not unlikely that some of the cases, in which subscriptions have been enforced at law, have been border cases, distinguished by slight circumstances from agreements held void for a want of consideration. 37. See, e.g., Allegheny College v. National Chautauqua City Bank, 246 N.Y. 369, _ 159 NE. 173, 174 (1927) (Cardozo, J.): [T]hough professing to apply to such subscriptions the general law of contract, we have found consideration present where the general law of contract, at least as then declared, would have said that it was absent. 38. See, e.g., Brokaw v. McElroy, 162 Iowa 288, 293, 143 N.W. 1087, 1089 (1913): To lightly withhold judicial sanction from such obligations would
7 CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW [Vol. 8 the real basis for the enforcement of charitable subscriptions has been public policy rather than any finding of consideration and have recommended that the courts forego their reliance on theories of consideration and recognize the rule for what it really is. 89 In response, several courts have abandoned these theories of consideration and have turned to the doctrine of promissory estoppel. 40 Thus, if a donor promises to give money to a charity and the charity expends money in reliance on that promise, the donor will be estopped from alleging a want of consideration as a defense to enforcement of the promise. 41 However, it has been suggested that the adoption of this doctrine may actually result in fewer enforceable subscriptions since the plaintiff will be required to prove that he relied on the promise to his detriment. 42 Although the doctrine may be more sound than some of the consideration theories, it would partially defeat the ultimate objective the courts are trying to accomplish. 48 ANALYSIS AND EFFECTS OF SALSBURY The Iowa court's adoption of Section 90 of Restatement Second of the Law of Contracts appears to be a direct response to these problems. The Restatement rule obviously makes unnecessary any showing of consideration and also eliminates the requirement of be to destroy millions of assets of the most beneficial institutions in our land, and to render such institutions helpless to carry out the purpose of their organization. See also note 21 supra. 39. CALAMARI & PERILLO 103, at , and Billig, supra note 8, at 480, suggest the following rule of law: "A written subscription to a charity, signed by the subscriber or his agent, and delivered to the charity, shall not be invalid or unenforceable for want of consideration." (Citations omitted). See also 23 MICH. L. REv. 910 (1925). 40. CALAMARI & PEMLLO 103, at 177; 1 WLrSTON 116, at See University of S. Cal. v. Bryson, 103 Cal. App. 39, 283 P. 949 (1930); Beatty v. Western College, 177 Ill. 280, 52 N.E. 432 (1898); In re Drain's Estate, 311 Ill. App. 481, 36 N.E.2d 608 (1941); Simpson Centenary College v. Tuttle, 71 Iowa 596, 33 N.W. 74 (1887) (dictum), noted in 13 IOWA L. REv. 332 (1928); Allegheny College v. National Chautauqua City Bank, 246 N.Y. 369, 159 N.E. 173 (1927) (dictum). Refer to note 20 supra and accompanying text for definition of promissory estoppel. 41. This doctrine is somewhat similar to the theory of consideration discussed at text accompanying notes supra where the incurring of expenses or obligations serves as consideration for the subscriber's promise. The difference between the two is that under a consideration theory the promisee's actions are bargained for, whereas under the promissory estoppel theory they are not. CALAMARi & PsiuaO 99, at CALAMARI & PERILLO 103, at See note 21 supra.
8 1975] CASE NOTES proving detrimental reliance on the promise. 44 What will be required, however, is a showing that a promise has been made by the promisor which he "should reasonably expect will induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee or a third person. '45 The court's opinion implies that whether or not a promise meets this requirement is to be determined by the wording of the subscription itself. 4 6 If the promise is unequivocal, it will be enforced; if, however, the language indicates that no firm promise is intended and that only an intention to give is expressed, the subscription will not be binding. 47 The Salsbury decision undoubtedly makes a break with previous case law in the area of charitable subscriptions. However, any changes effected by it will probably be visible more in theory than in practical results. Most courts have already been enforcing charitable subscriptions without requiring consideration, although they diligently maintain that it is still required. If the decision is followed, it probably will not result in the enforcement of more subscription agreements, but will only result in a change in the theories relied on in their enforcement. The new rule more accurately reflects the underlying rationale of the courts in subscription cases, and in this sense is more desirable. Robert Schwarzkopf--' RESTATEMENT (SECoND) or CoNTRAcTs 90 (2). 45. Id. at 90(1). 46. Salsbury at Id.
Charitable Subscriptions--Assignability-- Consideration--Sufficiency of Complaint (I & I Holding Corp. v. Gainsburg, 276 N.Y.
St. John's Law Review Volume 12, April 1938, Number 2 Article 12 Charitable Subscriptions--Assignability-- Consideration--Sufficiency of Complaint (I & I Holding Corp. v. Gainsburg, 276 N.Y. 427 (1938))
More informationChapter 11 Consideration and Promissory Estoppel 25-1
Chapter 11 Consideration and Promissory Estoppel 25-1 Consideration Consideration: something of legal value given in exchange for a promise Necessary for the existence of a contract Elements: Something
More informationNOTES- CONTRACTS. been completed (in other words had there been consideration) the Wills Act would have no application,
NOTES- CONTRACTS INADEQUACY OF FACTUAL BASIS FOR ENFORCING CHARITABLE SUBSCRIPTIONS Under facts strikingly similar to those involved in the leading New York case of Allegheny College v. National Chautauqua
More informationCOMMENT CHARITABLE SUBSCRIPTIONS IN ILLINOIS. LEWIs C. MURTAUGH*
COMMENT CHARITABLE SUBSCRIPTIONS IN ILLINOIS LEWIs C. MURTAUGH* ROMISES which lack a consideration have been so frequently enforced on the basis of the doctrine of promissory estoppel that it is fruitless
More informationCIVIL LAW COMMENTARIES
CIVIL LAW COMMENTARIES VOL. 2 WINTER 2009 ISSUE 1 Enforceability of Charitable Pledges Thomas B. Lemann 1 A lot of ink has been spilled, some with dubious accuracy, on this subject. Whether a charitable
More informationKING v. TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court 420 Mass. 52, 647 N.E.2d 1196 (1995)
KING v. TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court 420 Mass. 52, 647 N.E.2d 1196 (1995) Liacos, C.J., Abrams, Nolan, & Lynch, JJ. ABRAMS, J. A jury determined that Dr. Martin Luther
More informationContracts II Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Spring Optional Homework #1 - Model Answers
Contracts II Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Optional Homework #1 - Model Answers 1. Read King v. Trustees of Boston University, 647 N.E.2d 1196 (Mass.
More informationPENNSY SUPPLY, INC. v. AMERICAN ASH RECYCLING CORP. OF PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania Superior Court 2006 Pa. Super. 54, 895 A.
PENNSY SUPPLY, INC. v. AMERICAN ASH RECYCLING CORP. OF PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania Superior Court 2006 Pa. Super. 54, 895 A.2d 595 (2006) JOYCE, ORIE MELVIN and TAMILIA, JJ. ORIE MELVIN, J. Appellant, Pennsy
More informationQuestion If CapCo files a lawsuit against the Bears seeking damages for breach of contract, who is likely to prevail? Discuss.
Question 2 CapCo sells baseball caps to youth leagues and recently approached two new teams, the Bears and the Lions. Uncertain how many caps the team would require, the Bears team manager signed a written
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS HELEN CARGAS, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of PERRY CARGAS, UNPUBLISHED January 9, 2007 Plaintiff-Appellant, v Nos. 263869 and 263870 Oakland
More information408 MICH 579. TOUSSAINT v BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MICHIGAN. EBLING v MASCO CORPORATION. TOUSSAINT v BLUE CROSS-BLUE SHIELD
408 MICH 579 TOUSSAINT v BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MICHIGAN EBLING v MASCO CORPORATION RYAN, J. dissented in Toussaint. TOUSSAINT v BLUE CROSS-BLUE SHIELD RYAN, J. This is a suit for breach of an employment
More informationFINDING FOR DEFENDANT IN WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION PRECLUDES SUBSEQUENT PERSONAL INJURY SUIT BY STATUTORY BENEFICIARY
FINDING FOR DEFENDANT IN WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION PRECLUDES SUBSEQUENT PERSONAL INJURY SUIT BY STATUTORY BENEFICIARY Brinkman v. The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. 111 Ohio App. 317, 172 N.E.2d 154 (1960)
More informationImmunity Agreement -- A Bar to Prosecution
University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Law Review 7-1-1967 Immunity Agreement -- A Bar to Prosecution David Hecht Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr
More informationContracts - Agency - Right to Commission Hummer v. Engeman, 206 Va 102 (1965)
William & Mary Law Review Volume 7 Issue 1 Article 13 Contracts - Agency - Right to Commission Hummer v. Engeman, 206 Va 102 (1965) Robert P. Wolf Repository Citation Robert P. Wolf, Contracts - Agency
More informationMBE WORKSHOP: CONTRACTS PROFESSOR LISA MCELROY DREXEL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
MBE WORKSHOP: CONTRACTS PROFESSOR LISA MCELROY DREXEL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW CHAPTER 1: CONTRACTS Editor's Note 1: The below outline is taken from the National Conference of Bar Examiners' website. NOTE:
More informationMANUFACTURER LIABLE FOR BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY: PRIVITY NOT REQUIRED
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS MANUFACTURER LIABLE FOR BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY: PRIVITY NOT REQUIRED Rogers v. Toni Home Permanent Co., 167 Ohio St. 244, 147 N.E.2d 612 (1958) In her petition plaintiff alleged
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 7, 2003 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 7, 2003 Session LEROY McBEE v. DAVID ELLIOTT, ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Franklin County No. 15,854 Jeffrey F. Stewart, Chancellor
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS TAURUS MOLD, INC, a Michigan Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED January 13, 2009 v No. 282269 Macomb Circuit Court TRW AUTOMOTIVE US, LLC, a Foreign LC No.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ARMADA OIL COMPANY LLC d/b/a AOG TRUCKING, UNPUBLISHED September 22, 2015 Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 321636 Oakland Circuit Court BARRICK ENTERPRISES, INC., LC No. 2013-134391-CK
More informationA REVIEW OF PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL LAW IN MICHIGAN. Lee Hornberger. This article reviews Michigan promissory estoppel law, including the development of
A REVIEW OF PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL LAW IN MICHIGAN by Lee Hornberger This article reviews Michigan promissory estoppel law, including the development of promissory estoppel, the present law, and specific
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MARIE VANERIAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION July 1, 2008 9:00 a.m. v No. 276568 Wayne Circuit Court CHARLES L. PUGH CO., INC., LC No. 05-531590-CB Defendant,
More informationBeyond Reliance: Promissory Estoppel, Contract Formalities, and Misrepresentations
University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 1987 Beyond Reliance: Promissory Estoppel, Contract Formalities, and Misrepresentations Randy E. Barnett Mary E. Becker
More informationCASELAW APPENDIX (B) Detrimental Reliance
CASELAW APPENDIX (B) Detrimental Reliance In re Kenneth H., 80 Cal.App.4th 143, 95 Cal.Rptr.2d 5 Cal.App. 3 Dist., 2000. The Court of Appeal, Scotland, J., held that: (1) plea agreement was subject to
More informationRecent Case: Sales - Limitation of Remedies - Failure of Essential Purpose [Adams v. J.I. Case Co., 125 Ill. App. 2d 368, 261 N.E.
Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 22 Issue 2 1971 Recent Case: Sales - Limitation of Remedies - Failure of Essential Purpose [Adams v. J.I. Case Co., 125 Ill. App. 2d 368, 261 N.E.2d 1 (1970)] Case
More informationCorporate Law - Restrictions on Alienability of Stock
Louisiana Law Review Volume 25 Number 4 June 1965 Corporate Law - Restrictions on Alienability of Stock Marshall B. Brinkley Repository Citation Marshall B. Brinkley, Corporate Law - Restrictions on Alienability
More informationAcceptance of Unilateral Contract Offer Requiring Time in Performance
SMU Law Review Volume 5 1951 Acceptance of Unilateral Contract Offer Requiring Time in Performance Charles B. Redman Follow this and additional works at: http://scholar.smu.edu/smulr Recommended Citation
More informationChapter 14 Statute of Frauds and Equitable Exceptions 25-1
Chapter 14 Statute of Frauds and Equitable Exceptions 25-1 Statute of Frauds for Common Contracts Statute of Frauds: A state statute that requires certain types of contracts to be in writing 14-2 Contracts
More informationNo SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1974-NMSC-030, 86 N.M. 160, 521 P.2d 122 April 12, 1974 COUNSEL
1 UNITED STATES FID. & GUAR. CO. V. RATON NATURAL GAS CO., 1974-NMSC-030, 86 N.M. 160, 521 P.2d 122 (S. Ct. 1974) UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. RATON NATURAL GAS COMPANY,
More informationEMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS, BASICALLY. considered to be contractual, the "at will" relationship may be terminated at any time by either party.
American Bar Association Section on Labor and Employment Law Employment Rights and Responsibilities Basics Program Rancho Mirage, California March 24, 2004 EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS, BASICALLY Employment is
More informationReliance in the Revised Restatement: The Proliferation of Promissory Estoppel
University of California, Hastings College of the Law UC Hastings Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship 1981 Reliance in the Revised Restatement: The Proliferation of Promissory Estoppel Charles L.
More informationCorporations--Business Corporation Held Proper Beneficiary of Real Property Trust (Alcoma Corp. v. Ackerman, 26 Misc. 2d 678 (Sup. Ct.
St. John's Law Review Volume 35, May 1961, Number 2 Article 12 Corporations--Business Corporation Held Proper Beneficiary of Real Property Trust (Alcoma Corp. v. Ackerman, 26 Misc. 2d 678 (Sup. Ct. 1960))
More informationContracts--Specific Performance--Creation of a Constructive Trust [Butler v. Attwood, 369 F.2d 811 (6th Cir. 1966)]
Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 18 Issue 5 1967 Contracts--Specific Performance--Creation of a Constructive Trust [Butler v. Attwood, 369 F.2d 811 (6th Cir. 1966)] Fred A. Watkins Follow this and
More informationWhether Mutuality of Obligation Exists in a Contract is to be Determined by Arbitrators
The Ohio State University Knowledge Bank kb.osu.edu Ohio State Law Journal (Moritz College of Law) Ohio State Law Journal: Volume 23, Issue 2 (1962) 1962 Whether Mutuality of Obligation Exists in a Contract
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 BRIAN DOWLING, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellant v. PENNSYLVANIA PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE, MICHAEL J. FELICE, AND WANDA GEESEY, Appellees
More informationContracts Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Spring Contract Formation
Contracts Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Contract Formation I. Foundations A. Mutual Assent: Each party to a contract manifests its assent to the
More informationLouisiana Practice - Application of the Exception of Res Judicata in Petitory Actions
Louisiana Law Review Volume 15 Number 4 June 1955 Louisiana Practice - Application of the Exception of Res Judicata in Petitory Actions David M. Ellison Jr. Repository Citation David M. Ellison Jr., Louisiana
More informationIN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
E-FILED 2014 JAN 02 736 PM POLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY BELLE OF SIOUX CITY, L.P., v. Plaintiff Counterclaim Defendant MISSOURI RIVER HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT,
More informationBeginning Law Essay Writing Part 2 Professor Mary Schofield
Beginning Law Essay Writing Part 2 Professor Mary Schofield The following pages provide hard copies of the hypothetical used during this session, as well as a copy of the sample answer discussed. I suggest
More informationPromissory Estoppel Damages
University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 1987 Promissory Estoppel Damages Mary E. Becker Follow this and additional works at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JAMES P. SAYED, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED August 7, 2008 v No. 275293 Macomb Circuit Court PATRICIA J. SAYED, LC No. 2005-002655-CK Defendant-Appellee. Before:
More informationBills and Notes Constructive Acceptance of a Check by Retention
Nebraska Law Review Volume 38 Issue 4 Article 9 1959 Bills and Notes Constructive Acceptance of a Check by Retention Robert L. Walker University of Nebraska College of Law Follow this and additional works
More information--- N.E.2d ---- FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY Page N.E.2d ----, 2007 WL (Ill.App. 1 Dist.) (Cite as: --- N.E.2d ----) Nov. 13, 2007.
--- N.E.2d ---- FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY Page 1 Ross v. May Co. Ill.App. 1 Dist.,2007. Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. Appellate Court of Illinois,First District, Second Division. Gary
More informationAdams v. Barr. Opinion. Supreme Court of Vermont February 2, 2018, Filed No
No Shepard s Signal As of: February 7, 2018 8:38 PM Z Adams v. Barr Supreme Court of Vermont February 2, 2018, Filed No. 17-224 Reporter 2018 VT 12 *; 2018 Vt. LEXIS 10 ** Lesley Adams, William Adams and
More informationHARRIOTT v. TRONVOLD 671 N.W.2d 417 (Iowa 2003)
HARRIOTT v. TRONVOLD 671 N.W.2d 417 (Iowa 2003) LAVORATO, Chief Justice. In this declaratory judgment action involving three shareholders of a closed corporation, two of the shareholders sued the third.
More informationEmployment Contracts - Potestative Conditions
Louisiana Law Review Volume 13 Number 3 March 1953 Employment Contracts - Potestative Conditions Charles W. Howard Repository Citation Charles W. Howard, Employment Contracts - Potestative Conditions,
More informationBenjamin Plumbing, Inc. v. Barnes. Supreme Court of Wisconsin Decided June 20, 1991.
HEFFERNAN, CHIEF JUSTICE. Benjamin Plumbing, Inc. v. Barnes Supreme Court of Wisconsin Decided June 20, 1991. * * * In 1987 [William K.] Whitcomb contacted Benjamin Plumbing, Inc., an incorporated family
More informationThe Arbitrable Issue: The Problem of Fraud
Fordham Law Review Volume 28 Issue 4 Article 8 1959 The Arbitrable Issue: The Problem of Fraud Recommended Citation The Arbitrable Issue: The Problem of Fraud, 28 Fordham L. Rev. 802 (1959). Available
More informationRes Judicata Personal Injury and Vehicle Property Damage Arising from a Single Accident
Nebraska Law Review Volume 40 Issue 3 Article 12 1961 Res Judicata Personal Injury and Vehicle Property Damage Arising from a Single Accident John Ilich Jr. University of Nebraska College of Law Follow
More informationCONTRACTS AND SALES QUESTION 1
CONTRACTS AND SALES QUESTION Peter responded to an advertisement placed by Della, a dentist, seeking a dental hygienist. After an interview, Della offered Peter the job and said she would either: () pay
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ANGELO IAFRATE CONSTRUCTION CO., Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED September 13, 2002 v No. 232796 Court of Claims STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEPARTMENT OF LC No. 99-017418-CM
More informationWho's Afraid of Promissory Estoppel: Charitable Giving in Virginia and the Enforceability of Promised Gifts
Richmond Public Interest Law Review Volume 10 Issue 1 Article 4 1-1-2006 Who's Afraid of Promissory Estoppel: Charitable Giving in Virginia and the Enforceability of Promised Gifts Charlotte Dauphin Follow
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 17 March 2015
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA14-810 Filed: 17 March 2015 MACON BANK, INC., Plaintiff, Macon County v. No. 13 CVS 456 STEPHEN P. GLEANER, MARTHA K. GLEANER, and WILLIAM A. PATTERSON,
More informationAMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION, INC.
AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION, INC. Section 2. Section 3. ARTICLE I. General Effective Date. These Bylaws amend and restate in their entirety the Bylaws of the (the
More informationA Trustee in Bankruptcy as a Judgment Creditor
Nebraska Law Review Volume 39 Issue 2 Article 11 1960 A Trustee in Bankruptcy as a Judgment Creditor Duane Mehrens University of Nebraska College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr
More informationPromissory Estoppel and Louisiana
Louisiana Law Review Volume 31 Number 1 December 1970 Promissory Estoppel and Louisiana Federick H. Sutherland Repository Citation Federick H. Sutherland, Promissory Estoppel and Louisiana, 31 La. L. Rev.
More informationLotteries - Grocery Store Promotional Scheme Held a Lottery
DePaul Law Review Volume 5 Issue 2 Spring-Summer 1956 Article 12 Lotteries - Grocery Store Promotional Scheme Held a Lottery DePaul College of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review
More informationTURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS TRUSTS BILL 2015 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES
TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS TRUSTS BILL 2015 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES PART I PRELIMINARY CLAUSE 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation 3. Meaning of insolvent 4. Meaning of personal relationship
More informationDisciplinary Expulsion from a University -- Right to Notice and Hearing
University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Law Review 7-1-1967 Disciplinary Expulsion from a University -- Right to Notice and Hearing Timothy G. Anagnost Follow this and
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ANGEL REIF, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 18-C-884 ASSISTED LIVING BY HILLCREST LLC d/b/a BRILLION WEST HAVEN and KARI VERHAGEN, Defendants. DECISION
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS BILLY L. WHITSON, Plaintiff/Counter Defendant- Appellee, UNPUBLISHED September 20, 2002 v No. 229289 St. Clair Circuit Court CAROL L. KALTZ, LC No. 99-001907-CK Defendant/Counter
More informationCREIGHTON LAW REVIEW. [Vol. 11 BACKGROUND
COMMERCIAL LAW CONTRACTS-PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL MAY NOT BE ASSERTED To AVOID STATUTE OF FRAUDS-Farmland Services Co-op v. Klein, 196 Neb. 538, 244 N.W.2d 86 (1976). In Farmland Services Co-op v. Klein,' the
More informationUNIT 2 : CONSIDERATION
1.28 BUSINESS LAWS UNIT 2 : CONSIDERATION LEARNING OUTCOMES After studying this unit, you would be able to: Understand the concept of consideration, its importance for a contract and its double aspect.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS G.C. TIMMIS & COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, FOR PUBLICATION August 24, 2001 9:05 a.m. v No. 210998 Oakland Circuit Court GUARDIAN ALARM COMPANY, LC No. 97-549069 Defendant-Appellant.
More informationMEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
THE INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LENDING ASSOCIATION LIMITED MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION Incorporated on 29 June 2007 Company Number 06297217 Waterlow Legal & Company Services 6-8 Underwood Street
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LYCOMING COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA OPINION AND ORDER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LYCOMING COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH : : v. : CR: 734-2012 : CRIMINAL DIVISION STEPHEN TIMLIN, : Defendant : OPINION AND ORDER The Defendant filed a Motion to Reinstate
More informationCreation of the K a. Statute of Frauds land part performance one year debt 500 b. Offer master of the offer revoke mailbox rule absence of terms
Contracts outline I. Creation of the K a. Statute of Frauds requires that a sufficient writing, signed by the party to be charged be in existence for the following subject-matter (doesn t apply to restitution
More informationv No Wayne Circuit Court
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S JOWHARA ZINDANI and GAMEEL ZINDANI, Plaintiff-Appellees, UNPUBLISHED March 20, 2018 v No. 337042 Wayne Circuit Court NAGI ZINDANI and ANTESAR ZINDANI,
More informationCreditors' Remedies Against Holders of Watered Stock
Louisiana Law Review Volume 12 Number 3 March 1952 Creditors' Remedies Against Holders of Watered Stock J. Noland Singletary Repository Citation J. Noland Singletary, Creditors' Remedies Against Holders
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS AFFINITY RESOURCES, INC, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED October 10, 2013 v No. 308857 Oakland Circuit Court CHRYSLER GROUP, LLC, LC No. 2010-109642-CK Defendant-Appellee.
More informationThe West Bengal Societies Registration Act, [West Bengal Act XXVI of 1961]
The West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 [West Bengal Act XXVI of 1961] [5 th December, 1961 An Act to provide for the registration of literary, cultural, scientific, political, charitable, religious
More informationModification and Termination of Irrevocable Trusts Under the Ohio Uniform Trust Code
The University of Akron From the SelectedWorks of Alan Newman 2005 Modification and Termination of Irrevocable Trusts Under the Ohio Uniform Trust Code Alan Newman, University of Akron School of Law Jamie
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS. v No Macomb Circuit Court
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS BANK ONE NA, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED September 25, 2007 v No. 268251 Macomb Circuit Court HOLSBEKE CONSTRUCTION, INC, LC No. 04-001542-CZ Defendant-Appellant,
More informationCriminal Law - Misappropriation of Funds of a Commercial Partnership by One of the Partners
Louisiana Law Review Volume 18 Number 1 The Work of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the 1956-1957 Term December 1957 Criminal Law - Misappropriation of Funds of a Commercial Partnership by One of the Partners
More informationA BILL. i n t i t u l e d. An Act to amend the Labuan Offshore Trusts Act 1996.
A BILL i n t i t u l e d An Act to amend the Labuan Offshore Trusts Act 1996. [ ] ENACTED by the Parliament of Malaysia as follows: Short title and commencement 1. (1) This Act may be cited as the Labuan
More informationMemorandum of Association of SAMPLE DOCUMENTS LIMITED
The Companies Acts 1985, 1989 and 2006 Company Limited by Guarantee and not having a Share Capital Memorandum of Association of SAMPLE DOCUMENTS LIMITED 1. The name of the Company is SAMPLE DOCUMENTS LIMITED
More informationOVERVIEW OF CONTRACT LAW
OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT LAW Liability is generally the key issue in regards to contractual disputes. Purpose of K law is to provide the rules which determine when one party is liable to another under or in
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY PADUCAH DIVISION CASE NO.: 5:06cv23-R MARK L. CRAWFORD, M.D., P.S.C.,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY PADUCAH DIVISION CASE NO.: 5:06cv23-R MARK L. CRAWFORD, M.D., P.S.C., PLAINTIFF v. CENTRAL STATE, SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST AREAS HEALTH AND WELFARE
More informationPearson Education Limited Edinburgh Gate Harlow Essex CM20 2JE England and Associated Companies throughout the world
Pearson Education Limited Edinburgh Gate Harlow Essex CM20 2JE England and Associated Companies throughout the world Visit us on the World Wide Web at: www.pearsoned.co.uk Pearson Education Limited 2014
More informationAMENDED AND RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF SPRINGVILLE COOPERATIVE TELEPHONE ASSOCIATION
AMENDED AND RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF SPRINGVILLE COOPERATIVE TELEPHONE ASSOCIATION TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF IOWA: Pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 499, the members of the Springville
More informationNo SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1974-NMSC-004, 86 N.M. 305, 523 P.2d 549 January 11, Motion for Rehearing Denied June 18, 1974 COUNSEL
1 LAS CRUCES URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY V. EL PASO ELEC. CO., 1974-NMSC-004, 86 N.M. 305, 523 P.2d 549 (S. Ct. 1974) LAS CRUCES URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY, a public body, Plaintiff-Appellee, City of Las Cruces, New
More informationCompany Law: Conwest Exploration Company Limited et al. v. Letain, (1964) S.C.R. 20
Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 3, Number 3 (October 1965) Article 3 Company Law: Conwest Exploration Company Limited et al. v. Letain, (1964) S.C.R. 20 Burton B. C. Tait Follow this and additional works
More informationTestamentary Rights of a Beneficiary-Witness
SMU Law Review Volume 7 1953 Testamentary Rights of a Beneficiary-Witness Bob Price Robert W. Pack Jr. Follow this and additional works at: http://scholar.smu.edu/smulr Recommended Citation Bob Price,
More informationNo SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1974-NMSC-056, 86 N.M. 320, 523 P.2d 1346 July 03, 1974 COUNSEL
FARMERS AND MERCHANTS BANK V. WOOLF, 1974-NMSC-056, 86 N.M. 320, 523 P.2d 1346 (S. Ct. 1974) FARMERS AND MERCHANTS BANK, Plaintiff-appellee, vs. Dale WOOLF, Administrator with Will Annexed of the Estate
More informationDamages - The Compensatory Theory Favored over the Colateral Source Doctrine - Coyne v. Campbell, 11 N.Y.2d 372, 183 N.E.
DePaul Law Review Volume 12 Issue 2 Spring-Summer 1963 Article 13 Damages - The Compensatory Theory Favored over the Colateral Source Doctrine - Coyne v. Campbell, 11 N.Y.2d 372, 183 N.E.2d 891 (1962)
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JZQ, INC., ZUHER QONJA, and JAMAL QONJA, UNPUBLISHED May 27, 2004 Plaintiffs-Appellants, v No. 244538 Wayne Circuit Court MAMOON KARIM, LC No. 01-105611-CH Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff-Appellee,
More informationBYLAWS. California Board of Recreation and Part Certification, Inc. A California Public Benefit Corporation ARTICLE 1 NAME AND OFFICES
BYLAWS OF A California Public Benefit Corporation SECTION 1. NAME ARTICLE 1 NAME AND OFFICES The name of the corporation is SECTION 2. PRINCIPAL OFFICE The Board of Directors shall designate the location
More informationInjunction to Prevent Divulgence of Evidence Obtained by Wiretaps in State Criminal Prosecutions
Nebraska Law Review Volume 40 Issue 3 Article 9 1961 Injunction to Prevent Divulgence of Evidence Obtained by Wiretaps in State Criminal Prosecutions Allen L. Graves University of Nebraska College of Law,
More informationHot Cargo Clause and Its Effect Under the Labor- Management Relations Act of 1947
Washington University Law Review Volume 1958 Issue 2 January 1958 Hot Cargo Clause and Its Effect Under the Labor- Management Relations Act of 1947 Follow this and additional works at: http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview
More informationUNITED STATE BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Case No wsd. Greektown Holdings, L.L.C., et al.
UNITED STATE BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: Case No. 08-53104-wsd Greektown Holdings, L.L.C., et al. Chapter 11 Debtors. / Hon. Walter Shapero OPINION GRANTING DEBTOR
More informationCOHABITATION/NON-MARITAL PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
COHABITATION/NON-MARITAL PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made by and between Danny Defendant, residing at 45 River Road, East Brunswick, NJ, and Patty Plaintiff, residing at 100 Main Street, South
More informationQuestion 1. Is there adequate consideration for Chip Co s agreements above-described with Pam, Dave, Bob and Silicon, Inc.? Discuss.
Question 1 Ted is the President of Chip Co, a small company that makes computer chips for the secondary personal computer market. In the regular course of Chip Co s business Ted did the following: Ted
More informationTITLE 7 CONTRACTS TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE 7 CONTRACTS TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 7.01 General Provisions 7.0101 Definition 1 7.0102 Essential elements of a contract 1 7.0103 Law of place applied to contracts 1 7.0104 Time of performance 1
More informationCONTRACT LAW. Elements of a Contract
CONTRACT LAW Contracts: Types and Sources in Australia CONTRACT: An agreement concerning promises made between two or more parties with the intention of creating certain legal rights and obligations upon
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS DOUGLAS J. KLEIN and AMY NEUFELD KLEIN, Plaintiffs-Appellees, FOR PUBLICATION July 8, 2014 9:00 a.m. v No. 310670 Oakland Circuit Court HP PELZER AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS,
More informationSuccession Act 2006 No 80
New South Wales Succession Act 2006 No 80 Contents Chapter 1 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Definitions 2 Part 2.1 The making, alteration, revocation and revival of wills Division
More informationHON. MARK BROWN FOUNDATIONS ANALYSIS
HON. MARK BROWN FOUNDATIONS ANALYSIS PART 1 OPENING PROVISIONS 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3. Interpretation PART 2 ESTABLISHMENT OF FOUNDATIONS Application for Establishment 4. Application for the
More informationMULTIPLE-PARTY ACCOUNTS UNDER THE NEBRASKA PROBATE CODE
MULTIPLE-PARTY ACCOUNTS UNDER THE NEBRASKA PROBATE CODE RONALD R. VOLKMER* INTRODUCTION The drafters of the Probate Code evidently thought that it would be advisable to clarify the law relating not only
More informationExhibit A. Anti-Advance Waiver Of Lien Rights Statutes in the 50 States and DC
Exhibit A Anti-Advance Waiver Of Lien Rights Statutes in the 50 States and DC STATE ANTI- ADVANCE WAIVER OF LIEN? STATUTE(S) ALABAMA ALASKA Yes (a) Except as provided under (b) of this section, a written
More informationTEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-08-00517-CV Lisa Caufmann, Appellant v. Elsie Schroer, as Trustee of The Elsie R. Schroer Survivor's Trust, UTD, September 22, 1997, formerly known
More informationContracts - Offer Made in Newspaper Advertisement
Louisiana Law Review Volume 17 Number 1 Survey of 1956 Louisiana Legislation December 1956 Contracts - Offer Made in Newspaper Advertisement Thomas A. Warner Jr. Repository Citation Thomas A. Warner Jr.,
More information