A television director and a comic book writer entered into a contract to bring the writer’s best-selling comic book series to television as a miniseries. The writer agreed to write a television script based on his comic books and to transfer copyright of the script to the director. In return, the director promised to produce and direct the miniseries and to pay the writer a percentage of all ad revenues from the show. The writer completed the script on schedule. Midway through filming the miniseries, the director received a long-desired opportunity to direct a feature-length movie. Unable to direct both projects simultaneously, the producer assigned his contract with the comic book writer to the cable network that would be airing the series. The network promptly notified the comic book writer of the assignment. Despite the writer’s protests that the director’s artistic vision was needed for the project, the network completed the rest of the miniseries as planned, using its own, experienced and very competent director for the final episodes. The miniseries was initially well received, but the ratings and ad revenues for the final episodes were much lower than anticipated. After the series aired, critics noted that the artistry of the miniseries diminished after the director left the project. The writer sued the director, alleging that the contract was not assignable by the director and that substitution of the cable network’s own director had caused the decrease in ratings. Is the director liable to the comic book writer?

A father and a mother had been married for 30 years and had one adult son. The father and the mother agreed that each would make a will leaving his or her entire estate to the other, and when the surviving spouse died, the surviving spouse’s entire estate, including any inheritance received from the predeceased spouse, would be left to their son. The father, the mother, and the son visited a lawyer, who prepared wills for the father and the mother that carried out their testamentary intentions. The lawyer also prepared an agreement, which was signed by the father and the mother, in which each promised not to change the testamentary disposition benefiting the son. The son, who was present during the execution of the documents, was asked by the mother and the father if he agreed to the estate plan. He replied that he did. Shortly thereafter, the mother died. After collecting his distribution of the estate, the father moved in with his high school sweetheart. The father then made a new will, which was in effect at his death, leaving his entire estate to the sweetheart. If the son sues the father’s estate, what will he recover?

A tortfeasor injured a victim in an auto accident. While the victim was consequently hospitalized, the tortfeasor’s liability insurer settled with the victim for $15,000. The victim gave the insurer a signed release and received a signed memorandum wherein the insurer promised to pay the victim $15,000 within 30 days. When the victim left the hospital two days later, the hospital demanded payment of its $15,000 stated bill. The victim gave the hospital his own negotiable promissory note for $15,000, payable to the hospital’s order in 30 days; as security, the victim also assigned to the hospital the settlement memorandum from the insurer. Later, it was discovered that the tortfeasor was an irresponsible minor. In view of the tortfeasor’s age and irresponsibility when the insurer issued the liability policy, can the hospital recover on the assignment?

Hoping to gain a position on a campaign staff, an unemployed law student sent a detailed outline of a campaign strategy to a candidate for Congress. The candidate turned the materials over to his campaign manager, who advised the candidate to adopt some of them in his commercials. The candidate wrote the law student, thanking him for his interest in the campaign and stating that although he had a campaign staff and strategy in place, some of the ideas were good and he adopted them. He added, “To say ‘thanks’ to a future constituent, I’d like to offer to pay you for your expenses in developing the materials you sent me. Send the bill to my campaign headquarters.” Nevertheless, the candidate lost the election. One week after election day, the law student’s bill for $1,500 arrived at the candidate’s campaign headquarters. Campaign debts were high, and the candidate told his campaign manager not to pay the bill. The law student filed suit against the candidate to obtain payment of the bill plus an additional $10,000 for his ideas. What additional fact, if true, would most strengthen the candidate’s defense against the law student’s suit?

Perez is a 17-year-old high school student. The city in which Perez lives built a fancy course for mountain bike riding complete with hills, jumps, slopes, and gnarly terrain. Perez decided to buy a mountain bike to ride on the course.  Perez went to a local bike dealer, Downhill Bikes. Perez told the salesperson at Downhill Bikes about Perez’s desire to purchase a mountain bike to ride on the local course. The salesperson indicated he was familiar with the course and could show Perez a number of mountain bikes suitable for such riding. The salesman recommended the “Anti-Gravity 3000,” a great looking mountain bike.  Sandy, the salesman, knew the Anti-Gravity 3000 was on sale because it had multiple durability and quality control problems leading to parts of the bike breaking when subject to stress. But Sandy did not tell Perez about these problems. Instead, Sandy told Perez: “This is a really tough bike. Just the thing for jumps and hills.” Perez bought the bike – paying $1,000 down and promising to pay an additional $1,000 in two months. This arrangement was documented in an ordinary store receipt for the $1,000 down payment and short document, signed by Perez, indicating when Perez was to pay the balance. The bike was on sale and had a tag saying, “No returns or exchanges on sale price bikes.”  The next day, Perez took the bike to the park and started riding the course. At the bottom of the first large jump, the front fork, the back wheel’s spokes, and the lower bar of the main frame all failed. The bike literally fell apart on impact.  By some miracle, Perez was uninjured but he is determined to get a refund on the purchase price. Downhill Bikes refused to give Perez a refund or an exchange because (1) of the bike’s tag and (2) the bike is no longer ridable. Downhill also demands payment of the unpaid $1,000. Discuss. 

The mother of a son and a daughter was dying. The daughter visited her mother in a hospice facility and said, “You know that I have always been the good child, and my brother has always been the bad child. Even so, you have left your property in the will to us fifty-fifty. But it would be really nice if you would sell me the family home for $100,000.” “I don’t know,” said the mother. “It is worth a lot more than that-at least $250,000.” “That is true,” said the daughter. “But I have always been good and visited you, and my brother has never visited you, so that ought to be worth something. And besides, if you won’t sell me the house for that price, maybe I won’t visit you anymore, either.” “Oh, I wouldn’t want that,” said the mother, and she signed a contract selling the house to her daughter for $100,000. Shortly thereafter, the mother died. When her son found out that the house had been sold and was not part of his mother’s estate, he sued to have the contract avoided on behalf of the mother. On what ground would the contract most likely be avoided?

Before putting her home up for sale, a homeowner painted the living room ceiling to conceal major water damage caused by a leaking roof that had not yet been repaired. On the first day the home was offered for sale, the homeowner gave a buyer a personal tour. The homeowner made no statements at all regarding the water damage or the roof. Without discovering the water damage or the leaking roof and without consulting a lawyer, the buyer immediately agreed in writing to buy the home for $200,000. Before the closing date, the buyer discovered the water damage and the leaking roof. The cost of repair was estimated at $22,000. The buyer has refused to go through with the purchase. If the homeowner sues the buyer for breach of contract, is the homeowner likely to prevail?

On June 1, a seller agreed, in a writing signed by both the seller and the buyer, to sell an antique car to a buyer for $20,000. The car was at the time on display in a museum in a different city and was to be delivered to the buyer on August 1. On July 15, before the risk of loss had passed to the buyer, the car was destroyed by fire without fault of either party. Subsequent to the contract but before the fire, the car had increased in value to $30,000. The seller sued the buyer for the contract price of $20,000, and the buyer counterclaimed for $30,000. Which of the following will the court conclude?

On June 1, a general contractor and a subcontractor entered into a contract under which the subcontractor agreed to deliver all of the steel joists that the general contractor required in the construction of a hospital building. The contract provided that delivery of the steel joists would begin on September 1. Although the general contractor had no reason to doubt the subcontractor’s ability to perform, the general contractor wanted to be sure that the subcontractor was on track for delivery in September. He therefore wrote a letter on July 1 to the subcontractor demanding that the subcontractor provide assurance of its ability to meet the September 1 deadline. The subcontractor refused to provide such assurance. The general contractor then immediately obtained the steel joists from another supplier. If the subcontractor sues the general contractor for breach of contract, is the subcontractor likely to prevail?

Madeline and Alexander entered into a contract for Alexander to tutor Madeline’s son, Luke, in French during the school year to ensure that Luke receives a high grade in his language course.  After a couple of tutoring sessions, Alexander became angry with Luke’s lack of interest and declared that teaching Luke French was “impossible.” Is the contract discharged?