Description ASSIGNMENT NUMBER 1 - Law 1 - Business Law - Contracts Chapter 16 The Writing Requir ...

---

Description ASSIGNMENT NUMBER 1 - Law 1 - Business Law - Contracts Chapter 16 The Writing Requirement 1. Read the case Wood Care Centers v. Evangel Temple 2. Watch the youtube video on parol evidence in contracts 3. Explain in your own words the following statements from the case: 1. Wood Care argues the trial court improperly considered parol evidence in its interpretation of the Agreement and that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the trial court's conclusion that Evangel Temple did not breach the Agreement. We affirm. (Note, you must give a definition of parol evidence in your explanation.) 2. The Agreement contained a "ten-percent termination clause" that stated: Tenant, however, shall have the option of terminating this lease at any time by giving Landlord written notice of its election to do so and payment to Landlord of a sum of money equal to 10% of the balance of the rental payments then owed under the terms of this lease. The Agreement also contained a "tax-exemption termination clause" that stated: Both parties agree to cooperate with each other to achieve any available property tax exemption. In the event a property tax exemption for the leased premises is denied or suspended, Tenant shall have the option to terminate this lease. If, notwithstanding, the denial of such property tax exemption, Tenant elects to continue the lease, then Tenant shall be responsible for the payment of all property taxes and assessments and shall timely pay such taxes or assessments. 3. Lack of clarity or a disagreement among the parties does not necessarily create an ambiguity. Rather, whether "a contract is ambiguous is a question of law that must be decided by examining the contract as a whole in light of the circumstances present when the contract was entered." "If, after the pertinent rules of construction are applied, the contract can be given a definite or certain legal meaning, it is unambiguous and we construe it as a matter of law." 4. Who won and why. Post your work in your assignment box. (Remember to number and repeat each of the above statements or questions you are being asked to explain, 1-4. Post your response afterwards.) Each response is worth up to 25 points. Your explanation must be in your own words, do not simply copy the statement or what is in quotations. ASSIGNMENT NUMBER 2 - For this assignment, please read the brief summary of facts and respond to the following questions: Summary of Facts: Evelyn Vollmer orally agreed to loan Danny Lang $150,000 to make an investment in a local nightclub. The loan was to be repaid from the profits received from the investment. Their agreement was never memorialized in writing, however, Lang made payments totaling only $15,000 on the loan from the profits from the business. Vollmer filed a lawsuit alleging breach of contract. Using the information presented in Chapter 16, answer the following questions: 1. Lang claimed that repayment of the loan would "almost certainly" take over a year and that his agreement with Vollmer was therefore unenforceable because it was not in writing. Is he correct? Explain. 2. Suppose that a week after Vollmer gave Lang the funds, she sent him an e-mail containing the terms of their loan agreement with her name typed at the bottom. Lang did not respond to the e-mail. Is this sufficient as a writing under the Statute of Frauds? Why or why not? 3. Assume that at trial the court finds that the contract falls within the Statute of Frauds. Further assume that the State in which the court sits recognizes every exception to the Statute of Frauds discussed in the chapter. What exception provides Vollmer with the best chance of enforcing the oral contract in this situation? (State the exception and how it applies.) Please number and repeat each question followed by your response. Following proper format, along with the substance of your response, is very important in law. Accordingly, failure to do so will result in points being deducted.