Contracts: Difference between revisions

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 26: Line 26:
#An agreement containing a promise made by the one party for a valid consideration and agreed to by the other party.<ref>Leake Contr. p 9.</ref>
#An agreement containing a promise made by the one party for a valid consideration and agreed to by the other party.<ref>Leake Contr. p 9.</ref>
#"Every agreement and promise enforceable by law."<ref>Pollock Contr. p 1.</ref>
#"Every agreement and promise enforceable by law."<ref>Pollock Contr. p 1.</ref>
#"A mutual assent of two or more persons, competent to contract, founded on a sufficient and legal motive, inducement, or consideration to perform some legal act, or to omit to do anything, the performance whereof is not enjoined by law."<ref>Chitty Contr. p 9; [[''Haskell, etc., Co. v. Allegheny Forging Co.]]'', 47 Ind. A. 392, 91 NE 975, 976; ''[[Belt v. Marriott]]'', 9 Gill (Md.) 331, 335.</ref>  
#"A mutual assent of two or more persons, competent to contract, founded on a sufficient and legal motive, inducement, or consideration to perform some legal act, or to omit to do anything, the performance whereof is not enjoined by law."<ref>Chitty Contr. p 9;''[[Haskell, etc., Co. v. Allegheny Forging Co.]]'', 47 Ind. A. 392, 91 NE 975, 976; ''[[Belt v. Marriott]]'', 9 Gill (Md.) 331, 335.</ref>  
#"An obligation attached by the mere force of law to certain acts of the parties, usually words, which ordinarily accompany and represent a known Intent."<ref>''[[Hotchkiss v. New York Nat. City Bank]]'', 200 Fed. 287, 293, (aff 201 Fed. 664).</ref>
#"An obligation attached by the mere force of law to certain acts of the parties, usually words, which ordinarily accompany and represent a known Intent."<ref>''[[Hotchkiss v. New York Nat. City Bank]]'', 200 Fed. 287, 293, (aff 201 Fed. 664).</ref>
#"A transaction between two or more persons, In which each party comes under an obligation to the other, and each reciprocally acquires a right to what is promised by the other."<ref>Per Washington, J., in ''[[Dartmouth College v. Woodward]]'', 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 518, 656, 4 L. ed. 629 [quot 1 Powell Contr. p 6, and quot ''[[United Transp., etc., Co. v. New York, etc., Transp. Line]]'', 180 Fed. 902, 904 (aff 185 Fed. 386, 107 CCA 442). To same effect ''[[Chesapeake, etc., Canal Co. v. Baltimore, etc., R. Co.]]'', 4 Gill & J. (Md.) 1.</ref>
#"A transaction between two or more persons, In which each party comes under an obligation to the other, and each reciprocally acquires a right to what is promised by the other."<ref>Per Washington, J., in ''[[Dartmouth College v. Woodward]]'', 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 518, 656, 4 L. ed. 629 [quot 1 Powell Contr. p 6, and quot ''[[United Transp., etc., Co. v. New York, etc., Transp. Line]]'', 180 Fed. 902, 904 (aff 185 Fed. 386, 107 CCA 442). To same effect ''[[Chesapeake, etc., Canal Co. v. Baltimore, etc., R. Co.]]'', 4 Gill & J. (Md.) 1.</ref>

Revision as of 01:35, May 4, 2020


Contracts Treatise
Table of Contents
Contracts Outline
Introduction and Definitions
Introduction
Definitions
Elements
Contract law in the United States
Contract formation
Parties
Offer
Acceptance
Intention to Bind
Formal requisites
Mailbox rule
Mirror image rule
Invitation to deal
Firm offer
Consideration
Consent
Implication-in-fact
Collateral contract
Modification
Merger
Uniform Commercial Code
Uniform Commercial Code
Course of dealing
Course of performance
UCC-1 financing statement
Uniform Commercial Code adoption
Defenses against formation
Lack of capacity
Duress
Undue influence
Illusory promise
Statute of frauds
Uncertainty
Non est factum
Contract interpretation
Governing law
Construction and Operation
Parol evidence rule
Contract of adhesion
Integration clause
Contra proferentem
Excuses for non-performance
Mistake
Misrepresentation
Frustration of purpose
Impossibility
Impracticability
Illegality
Unclean hands
Unconscionability
Accord and satisfaction
Rights of third parties
Privity of contract
Assignment
Delegation
Novation
Third-party beneficiary
Performance or Breach
Necessity of performance
Sufficiency of performance
Anticipatory repudiation
Cover
Exclusion clause
Efficient breach
Deviation
Fundamental breach
Termination
Termination
Rescission
Termination and rescission
Abrogation and rescission
Subsequent contract
Termination
Forfeiture
Remedies
Restitution
Specific performance
Liquidated damages
Punitive damages
Quasi-contractual obligations
Estoppel
Quantum meruit
Actions
Actions in General
Parties to Action
Pleading
Evidence
Questions of Law and Fact
Instructions
Trial and Judgment

Introduction to Contracts

Definition of a Contract

While perhaps a complete and final definition of the term will never be formulated, the statement that a contract is "an agreement which creates an obligation"[1] would seem to embody all of its essential elements, which may be enumerated as:

  1. Parties competent to contract.
  2. A subject matter.
  3. A legal consideration.
  4. Mutuality of agreement.
  5. Mutuality of obligation.

Other Common Law Definitions

  1. "A contract may be defined as an agreement between competent parties, supported by a legal consideration, and In the form, If any, prescribed by law, creating an obligation on the part of one or both to do or refrain from doing some lawful thing."[2]
  2. "The agreement of two competent parties about a legal and competent subject matter, upon a mutual legal consideration, with a mutuality of obligation." [3]
  3. "An agreement upon sufficient consideration. to do or not to do a particular thing." [4]
  4. "A voluntary and lawful agreement, by competent parties, for a good consideration, to do or not do a. specified thing."[5]
  5. "The agreement of minds, upon a sufficient consideration, that something specified shall be done, or shall not be done."[6]
  6. "The meeting of minds upon and agreement to a definite thing."[7]
  7. "A bargain or agreement voluntarily made upon good consideration, between two or more persons capable of contracting, to do, or forbear to do, some lawful act."[8]
  8. "An agreement between two or more parties, for the doing or the not doing or some particular thing."[9]
  9. "A deliberate engagement between competent parties, upon a legal consideration, to do or to abstain from doing some act."[10]
  10. "A promise from one or more persons to another or others, either made in fact or created by the law, to do or refrain from some lawful thing; being also under the seal of the promisor, or being reduced to a judicial record, or being accompanied by a valid consideration, or being executed, and not being in a form forbidden or declared inadequate by law."[11]
  11. "An agreement enforceable at law, made between two or more persons, by which rights are acquired by one or more to acts or forebearances on the part of the other or others."[12]
  12. An agreement by which two parties mutually promise and engage, or one of them promises or engages to the other, to give some particular thing or to do or abstain from doing some particular act.[13]
  13. An agreement containing a promise made by the one party for a valid consideration and agreed to by the other party.[14]
  14. "Every agreement and promise enforceable by law."[15]
  15. "A mutual assent of two or more persons, competent to contract, founded on a sufficient and legal motive, inducement, or consideration to perform some legal act, or to omit to do anything, the performance whereof is not enjoined by law."[16]
  16. "An obligation attached by the mere force of law to certain acts of the parties, usually words, which ordinarily accompany and represent a known Intent."[17]
  17. "A transaction between two or more persons, In which each party comes under an obligation to the other, and each reciprocally acquires a right to what is promised by the other."[18]
  18. "An agreement where both parties become obligated."[19]
  19. "A voluntary agreement between two parties, the coming together of two minds by a common intent."[20]
  20. "An agreement between competent parties, supported by a legal consideration, and there can be no contract in its true sense without a meeting of minds."[21]
  21. "The union of two or more minds in a thing done or to be done."[22]
  22. "The meeting of the minds of the contracting parties."[23]
  23. "A drawing together of minds until they meet."[24]
  24. "A writing is not a contract when it fails to express that on which the minds of the parties met, and courts freely exercise power to correct mistakes when the proof leaves no doubt that the real contract was something else."[25]
  25. "A proposition made by one contracting party and accepted by the other constitutes a contract. It evidences the meeting of their minds upon the terms of their agreement, and binds them both."[26]
  26. Where a promise is made on one side and assented to on the other, or where two or more persons enter into an engagement with each other by a promise on either side.[27]
  27. A speech between two parties whereby something is to be done.[28]
  28. "When both parties will the same thing, and each communicates his will to the other, with a mutual engagement to carry it into effect."[29]
  29. "An agreement between two or more persons, whereby, in consideration of something done, or promised to be done, by the party on one side, the party on the other side undertakes to do, or not to do a particular thing."[30]
  30. "A compact between two or more parties."[31]

Statutory Definitions

This section is empty.
You can help by adding to it.


References

  1. ↑ Ward v. Johnson
  2. ↑ 9 Cyc 240
  3. ↑ State v. Barker, Kan. 379, 886, 98 AmD 176
  4. ↑ Haskell, etc., Co. v. Allegheny Forging Co., 47 Ind. A. 392, 91 NE 975, 976; Komp v. Raymond, 176 N. Y. 102, 108, 67 NE 113; Langullle v. State, 4 Tex. A. 812, 821; To same effect Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 11 Pet. (U.S.) 420, 9 L. ed. 771, 938; Sturgell v. Crowinnshield, 4 Wheat. (U.S.) 122, 4 L. ed. 529; American Can Co. v. Agricultural ins. Co., 12 Cal. A. 133, 106 P 720; Barlow v. Gregory, 31 Conn. 261; Weishut v. Layton, 28 Del. 364, 93 A 1057; Jones v. Tucker, 26 Del. 422, 84 A 1012; Modern Mach. Co. v. Perkins, 26 Del. 127, 80 A 1080; Speakman v. Price, 25 Del. 377, 80 A 627; Moline Jewelry Co. v. Otwell, 25 Del. 129, 78 A 300; Merritt v. Layton, 24 Del. 212, 75 A 795; Adkins v. Campbell, 22 Del. 96, 64 A 628; Peo. v. Dummer, 274 Ill. 637, 113 NE 934; Beverly v. Barnitz, 55 Kan. 486, 42 P 725, 49 AmSR 257, 31 LRA 74; Pfaff v. Gruen, 92 Mo. A. 560, 69 SW 405; Virginia City Gas Co. v. Virginia City, 3 Nev. 320; Union Free School Dist. No. 6 v. Union Free School Dist. No. 7, 76 App. Div. 355, 78 NYS 522 [aff 179 N.Y. 556 mem, 71 NE 112 mem]; Pierce v. Lewis, 9 Pa. Co. 250; Willis v. Turnley, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 789; Swinburne v. Mills, 17 Wash. 611, 50 P 489, 61 AmSR 932; 2 Kent Comm. p 449.
  5. ↑ Robinson v. Magee, 9 Cal. 81, 83, 70 AmD 638.
  6. ↑ Blakemore v. Cooper, 15 N. D. 5, 13, 106 NW 566, 125 AmSR 574, 4 LRANS 1074 [quot Edwards v. Keaney, 98 U.S. 595, 24 L. ed. 793]
  7. ↑ Loma Prieta Lumber Co. v. Hinton, 12 Cal. A. 766, 771, 108 P 528.
  8. ↑ Justice v. Lang, 42 N. Y. 493, 497, 1 AmR 576 [quot 1 Comyn Contr. p 2].
  9. ↑ 1 Parson Contr. § 2. To same effect Jones v. Tucker, 26 Del. 422, 84 A 101; Modern Mach. Co. v. Perkins, 26 Del. 127, 80 A 1060; [[Speakman v. Price, 25 Del. 377, 80 A 627; Moline Jewelry Co. v. Otwell, 26 Del. 129, 78 A 300; Merritt v. Layton, 24 Del. 212, 75 A 795; Weinsberg v. St. Louis Cordage Co., 135 Mo. A. 553, 116 SW 461.
  10. ↑ Languille v. State, 4 Tex. A. ll12, 321 [quot Story Contr. § 1]. To same effect Miller v. Palmer, 58 Md. 451; Pelham v. State, 30 Tex. 422.
  11. ↑ Bishop Contr. § 22.
  12. ↑ Anson Contr. p 11.
  13. ↑ Hall Torts & Contr. p 153.
  14. ↑ Leake Contr. p 9.
  15. ↑ Pollock Contr. p 1.
  16. ↑ Chitty Contr. p 9;Haskell, etc., Co. v. Allegheny Forging Co., 47 Ind. A. 392, 91 NE 975, 976; Belt v. Marriott, 9 Gill (Md.) 331, 335.
  17. ↑ Hotchkiss v. New York Nat. City Bank, 200 Fed. 287, 293, (aff 201 Fed. 664).
  18. ↑ Per Washington, J., in Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 518, 656, 4 L. ed. 629 [quot 1 Powell Contr. p 6, and quot United Transp., etc., Co. v. New York, etc., Transp. Line, 180 Fed. 902, 904 (aff 185 Fed. 386, 107 CCA 442). To same effect Chesapeake, etc., Canal Co. v. Baltimore, etc., R. Co., 4 Gill & J. (Md.) 1.
  19. ↑ Safford v. Wyckoff, 4 Hill (N. Y.) 442, 456.
  20. ↑ McNeill v. Durham, etc., R. Co., 135 N. C. 682, 687, 47 SE 765. 67 LItA 227.
  21. ↑ J. I. Case Threshing Mach. Co. v. Meyers, 78 Nebr. 685, 687, 111 NW 602. 9 LRANS 970.
  22. ↑ Dietz v. Farish, 44 N. Y. Super 190, 199, 53 HowPr 217 (aff 79 N. Y. 520).
  23. ↑ Per Park, J., in Atwater v. Lockwood, 39 Conn. 45, 49.
  24. ↑ Per Birdseye, J., in McNulty v. Prentice, 25 Barb. (N. Y.) 204, 207.
  25. ↑ Wolfgram v. Schoepke, 123 Wis. 19, 26, 100 NW 1054, 3 AnnCas 398.
  26. ↑ Illinois Trust, etc., Bank v. Arkansas City, 76 Fed. 271, 285, 22 CCA 171. 34 LRA 518.
  27. ↑ 2 Stephen Comm. pp. 108, 109.
  28. ↑ The Mirror.
  29. ↑ Haynes v. Haynes, 1 Dr. & Sm. 426, 62 Reprint 442, 445.
  30. ↑ Wheeler v. Glasgow, 97 Ala. 700. 705. 11 S 758.
  31. ↑ Marshall. C. J., in Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch (U. S.) 87, 136, 3 L. ed. 162.
Retrieved from "https://www.wikilawschool.net/w/index.php?title=Contracts&oldid=38974"