Contract Law: From Trust to Promise to Contract (HLS2X) | Unit 1: Complications and Quiz | Uncle's Promises | Uncle's Promise Challenge Part 3
Photo by Morning Brew on Unsplash
September 15, 2020
Contract Law: From
Trust to Promise to Contract (HLS2X)
Unit 1 | Complications and Quiz | Uncle’s Promises | Uncle’s Promise
Challenge Part 3
Instructor Charles Fried, Beneficial
Professor of Law:
My re-written lecture notes for Unit 1, Complications and Quiz – Uncle’s Promises – Uncle’s Promise Challenge Part 2 hyperlink: My Rewritten Uncle's Promise Challenge Part 3 Hyperlink
Now, before Professor Fried move us on to our next Contract Law online lecture legal case. He will give us a tricky twist to the Hamer verses Sidway case, in another extraordinary exception coordinated bargain-for-exchanges offer litigation paradoxical situations is a follow:
What if, Hamer (the Defendant [the nephew]) on or about his
twentieth (20th) birthday was seen with his friends by Sidway’s (the
Plaintiff’s [the uncle’s]) friends who[m] saw his nephew at the local pool
hall:
1. drinking alcoholic
beverages such as, gin or whiskey;
2. using illegal drugs or controlled
substances such as, marijuana, MDMA or prescription opioids;
3. using vulgar or
profanity languages; and
4. gambling at the poker
table.
And, Sidway’s (the Plaintiff’s [the uncle’s]) friends had reported Hamer (the Defendant [his nephew]) behavior to Sidway (the Plaintiff [the uncle]).
As a consequence, could Sidway (the Plaintiff [the uncle]) sue Hamer (the Defendant [his nephew]) over their coordinated bargain-for-exchanges offer agreements breach of contract?
After, Hamer (the Defendant [the nephew]) had breach Sidway (the Plaintiff [his uncle]) real cooperation in trusts, promises, and commitments contract offer from an abided agreement in not to drink, smoke, use profanity languages or gamble.
And, do you remember in the Hamer verses Sidway case in which, Hamer (the Plaintiff [the nephew]) sue Sidway (the Defendant [the uncle]) estate, and won. After, Sidway (the Defendant [the uncle]) death and, Hamer (the Plaintiff [his nephew]) had abided by Sidway (the Defendant [his uncle]) agreements not to drink, smoke, use profanity languages or gamble before his twenty first (21st) birthday.
What do you think?
[1]
Charles Fried, edX, Unit 1 – Complications and
Quiz – Uncle’s Promise – Uncle’s Promise Challenge Part 2,
Comments