Contract Law: From Trust to Promise to Contract (HLS2X) | Unit 1: Complications and Quiz | More Complications | Brother-In-Law Part 1 | Discussion Board

 

Photo by Boston Public Library on Unsplash

September 28, 2020 

Contract Law: From Trust to Promise to Contract (HLS2X) 

Unit 1 | Complications and Quiz | More Complications | Brother-In-Law Part 1 | Discussion Board 

Instructor Charles Fried, Beneficial Professor of Law: 

Unit 1 – Complications and Quiz – More Complications – Brother-In-Law Part 1 – Discussion Board hyperlink:  My Rewritten Brother-In-Law Part 1 Lecture Notes Hyperlink 

Can the Sister-In-Law Sue? Why? 

In the Kirksey versus Kirksey case, the Sister-In-Law (Plaintiff) cannot sue the Brother-In-Law (Defendant) during an era of 1845 because societal scientific law applications onto how those time evaluated their judiciary system[s] reviews in a[n] applied tests (prima facie evidences) were interpreted differently in an applied court procedures than the way our United States’ judiciary system[s] applied and interpreted scientific law applications and theories today. Thus said, if we apply our Contract Law four (4) principal types’ prima facie evidences for the year on or about 1845 in which, we had previously studied and analyzed than we will discover in the Kirksey versus Kirksey case whether or not the Sister-In-Law (Plaintiff) and the Brother-In-Law (Defendant) had established a real bargain-for-exchanges litigation are as follows: 

Prima Facie Evidences: 

	Brother-In-Law	Sister-In-Law
1.       Does both parties create a legal relation?	yes	yes
2.       Were both parties serious?	yes	yes
3.       Were both parties’ bargain-for-exchanges legal and moral contract?	Yes	Yes  (or No)  (The Sister-In-Law had never explained what she had exchange, as her bargain, so this depends on what the Sister-In-Law bargain-for-exchange was in the of 1845, time of reference either free labor working on the Brother-In-Law farmland or sexual acts.)
4.       Was the Brother-In-Law Housing gratuitously offer being a Gift or a Bargain?	Gift	Bargain

 Therefore, after, I had applied my four (4) principal Contract Law types analyzes, as prima facie evidences (shown above) from a scientific law application in order to determine the Kirksey versus Kirksey case. The Brother-In-Law (Defendant) had gratuitously offered the Sister-In-Law only temporary housings are considered a gift and not a bargain-for-exchanges and, the Sister-In-Law (Plaintiff) cannot sue the Brother-In-Law (Defendant) for changing his mind to continue her gratuitously temporary housing offer. 

On the other hand, today, in our United States judiciary system[s] most likely will evaluate their judiciary system[s] reviews in an applied tests (prima facie evidences) as a Doctrine of Consideration from an Extraordinary Exception in the Sister-In-Law (Plaintiff) civil cause of action case against her Brother-In-Law (Defendant) which means, the Sister-In-Law (Plaintiff) litigation does not appeared to be a real contract from a cooperation in trusts, promises and commitments. And, her litigation falls within the category of an extraordinary exceptions for a Doctrine of Consideration which does not enforced contract promises between parties but compensate for the Sister-In-Law (Plaintiff) harm by ways of reliance or restitution damages in compensation from Sister-In-Law (Plaintiff) and her children being remove their gratuitously housing offer by the Brother-In-Law (Defendant).