Answer These 14 Questions In Detail Using Proper Business La

Answer These 14 Questions In Detail Using Proper Business Law Vocabulary

1. The limitation in the NFL contract that states if the player is arrested or photographed drunk in public, the contract is void, is best classified as a contractual restriction or clause. Specifically, in business law, this type of clause is known as a "restrictive covenant" or "limitation clause." It is a contractual provision that limits the player's conduct outside of employment, effectively making certain behaviors grounds for contract termination. Under chapter 18 terminology, this is akin to a "limit on contractual obligations" or a "performance condition," where the contract enforces specific conduct, and breach of that condition (e.g., arrest or public intoxication) results in contract termination.

2. In the scenario involving the hiring of housekeepers for $120, failing to dust the ceiling fans and missing spots with the toilet scrubber does not constitute a material breach of contract. A material breach refers to a significant failure that substantially defeats the essential purpose of the contract. Since the housekeepers completed their job and the deviations did not substantially impair the contract's overall purpose, this is classified as a non-material breach or a minor breach. The remaining issue is a minor deficiency, which might entitle the employer to damages or a remedy but not termination of the contract.

3. Concerning the construction of a house for $200,000 amid a hurricane that raises material costs by 50%, the builder's best legal argument relies on the doctrine of "commercial frustration" or "impracticability." Under chapter 18 vocabulary, the builder can argue that an unforeseen event—here, the hurricane—has made performance extremely difficult or impossible without incurring excessive cost. The increase in material costs, from a legal standpoint, may mean the original contract price is now insufficient for performance, and the builder may seek to renegotiate or abandon the contract under the doctrine of impracticability, which excuses performance when unforeseen events fundamentally change contractual obligations.

4. The doctrine under which you are required to pay the guide even if you cancel is the "implied obligation of consideration" or possibly "pre-existing duty" in contract law. If the guide declined other trips and booked your reservation, you had a binding agreement, and consideration was exchanged for the reservation. Even if you cancel, the guide may still be entitled to compensation because you entered into a binding contract. If someone else called later to book for the same time, the original reservation still holds because the guide had already committed by accepting the initial offer—thus, the second booking would generally be a new, independent offer. The initial (your) contract remains valid and binding under the principle of contractual priority.

5. If you leave a building project midway to pursue a more lucrative opportunity, your liability depends on whether there is an enforceable contract. Under business law, you may be held liable for breach of contract if you have agreed to complete the barn and have not explicitly or implicitly been released from that obligation. The farmer can likely force you to complete the project or seek damages for the breach of contract if they can prove a valid enforceable agreement existed. The extent of liability is usually limited to damages caused by non-performance or the cost to complete the work, unless the contract includes clauses for early termination or breach.

6. The standard for recovering consequential damages, as discussed in the case Hadley v. Baxendale, involves proving that the damages were foreseeable or within the contemplation of both parties at the time of contract formation. Under business law, consequential damages are recoverable if they are a natural or probable result of the breach and if the breaching party knew or should have known that such damages could occur. Essentially, the relevant law requires that damages be reasonably foreseeable and directly linked to the breach to be recoverable.

7. If a dispute arises over painting work on a home, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) usually does not apply because the UCC primarily governs the sale of goods, not services. Since painting is a service, and not a tangible good, the governing law would typically be common law contracts principles—covering issues such as breach, performance, and remedies—rather than the UCC. Therefore, the dispute would be resolved under general contract law, unless the contract explicitly involves the sale of goods or related supplies covered by the UCC.

8. Regarding whether the following are merchants under the UCC:

• a. A CPA doing your 2015 tax return: No, a CPA is not typically considered a merchant under UCC because they are providing a professional service, not a merchant dealing in goods.
• b. Taco Bell selling nachos: Yes, Taco Bell is a merchant because it is engaged in the business of selling goods to consumers.
• c. A & M-Central Texas selling its lone vehicle: Yes, because A & M-Central Texas is engaged in the sale of goods (a vehicle) in the ordinary course of business, making it a merchant under UCC.

9. Contracting to buy a car for $20,000 and the dealer adding a clause requiring the purchase of an extended protection plan for $1,000 raises the question of the enforceability of this additional term. Under the UCC, a contract can be formed for the sale of goods, and additional terms may be included unless they materially alter the original contract or are expressly conditioned on the other party's assent. If the seller's inclusion of the clause is seen as a proposed modification or addition that does not materially alter the original agreement, the contract may still be binding under the UCC, especially if you accept or do not object. Under common law, the addition of new terms requires mutual acceptance, so the clause might be viewed as a counteroffer. Therefore, under the UCC, the contract likely remains valid, but under common law, it might require mutual agreement for the extension plan.

10. The CISG (United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods) facilitates international trade by providing a uniform legal framework for cross-border sales contracts. Its value lies in reducing legal uncertainties, harmonizing contract rules across jurisdictions, and fostering international commerce by simplifying dispute resolution and contract enforcement for international sellers and buyers.

11. Negotiable instruments are formal written documents that promise or order a sum of money that is transferable. Writing on a yellow sticky note, "I promise to pay Tom or bearer $200 on April 15," and adding a thumbprint may qualify as a negotiable instrument if it meets criteria like unconditional promise, fixed amount, signed by the maker, and payable on demand or at a future date. However, given the informal medium (sticky note) and limited formalities, it may not qualify as a classic negotiable instrument. If it is deemed negotiable, Tom may market or sell it for cash, but its value could be uncertain due to potential legal doubts about its authenticity or formal compliance with negotiability standards.

12. Advising your wife not to sign her checks until she reaches the bank is good legal advice because it helps prevent unauthorized or premature endorsement, which could lead to fraud or disputed transactions. By waiting until she can verify all details and physically endorse the check at the bank, she aligns with the legal concept of proper endorsement, reducing exposure to liability or unauthorized transfers.

13. If your stolen debit card is used fraudulently for $800 before you notify the bank, under U.S. law (Regulation E), you are typically liable for only $50 if you report the loss within two business days. If you delay reporting beyond that period, your liability increases to $500 or more. Since you reported after a week and assuming the law applies, you would likely be responsible for the full $800, and the bank may not be liable for the unauthorized transactions beyond your liability limit. Prompt reporting is critical in limiting your losses.

14. The benefit of a cashier’s check is its security and guaranteed funds. The bank issues a cashier’s check drawn on its own funds, making it more reliable than personal checks, which can bounce if insufficient funds are available. Cashier’s checks are widely accepted for large transactions, escrow, and transactions requiring guaranteed payment, providing both buyer and seller assurance of payment security and reducing fraud risk.

References

• Cheeseman, H. R. (2021). Business Law: Legal Environment, Online Commerce, Business Ethics, and International Issues. Pearson.
• Miller, R. L., & Jentz, G. A. (2020). Business Law Today: The Essentials. Cengage Learning.
• Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). (2022). Official Text and Comments.
• Farnsworth, E. A. (2018). Contracts: Cases and Materials. Aspen Publishing.
• Schneiderman, J. A. (2019). International Contracts and Dispute Resolution. Cambridge University Press.
• Restatement (Second) of Contracts. (1981). American Law Institute.
• Miller, D. (2017). Negotiable Instruments Law. West Academic Publishing.
• United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). (1980).
• Regulation E, Electronic Fund Transfers. (2023). Federal Reserve Board.
• The Principles of European Contract Law (PECL). (2018). European Law Institute.