For This Assignment, You'll Be Given A Real-World Sce 301539

For This Assignment Youll Be Given A Real World Scenario And Youll

For this assignment, you'll be given a real-world scenario and you'll have to complete memorandum of law. In this scenario, you work for a Georgia-based law firm as a paralegal. The case involves a dispute over a lease agreement between Galaxy Corporation and Manner Investment Group. The handwritten lease was signed by representatives of both parties, but Manner Investment later sent a more comprehensive lease agreement, which Galaxy refused to sign. Your task is to prepare a memorandum of law outlining the legal arguments for Manner Investment, as well as counterarguments for Galaxy, focusing on performance and discharge under Georgia law.

Paper For Above instruction

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

To: Senior Partner

From: Paralegal

Date: [Insert Date]

Subject: Legal Analysis of Lease Dispute Between Manner Investment Group and Galaxy Corporation

The dispute between Manner Investment Group and Galaxy Corporation centers on the enforceability and nature of their alleged lease agreement. The core issue revolves around whether the written handwritten document constitutes a binding contract, and if subsequent actions by each party impact their legal obligations concerning performance and discharge under Georgia law.

Legally, Manner Investment Group's primary argument is that the handwritten lease agreement, signed by authorized representatives of both parties, constitutes a valid and enforceable contract under Georgia law. The essential elements of a contract—a mutual agreement, consideration, legal capacity, and lawful purpose—appear satisfied. The document clearly states the terms, including parties, property, lease duration, rent, and signatures, which fulfills the statutory requirements for a valid lease agreement in Georgia (O.C.G.A. § 44-7-2). Moreover, the fact that Galaxy tendered the initial deposit and first month’s rent further reinforces the existence of mutual assent and performance consistent with the terms of the handwritten agreement, making it more than just a preliminary or tentative arrangement.

Georgia courts traditionally uphold the enforceability of handshake deals or informal agreements provided that essential terms are agreed upon and the parties demonstrate conduct consistent with the contract (See Georgia Power Co. v. Freedom, 188 Ga. App. 272, 1988). The subsequent conduct—Galaxy’s tendering of initial payments—can be seen as performance under the contract, which significantly bolsters Manner Investment’s position that a binding agreement was formed. The doctrine of part performance, recognized under Georgia law, supports that actions taken in reliance on the contract’s existence can remove the statute of frauds defense and reinforce enforceability (O.C.G.A. § 13-5-30). Therefore, Manner Investment can argue that Galaxy’s refusal to sign the formal lease does not negate the binding effect of the written agreement, especially considering the parties’ conduct.

Regarding performance and discharge, Georgia law emphasizes that once a party performs or begins to perform their contractual obligations, they are generally entitled to continue performance unless there is a material breach. In this case, Galaxy’s initial performance—paying the deposit and first month’s rent—indicates acceptance and performance of the core contractual obligations under the handwritten lease. Manner Investment, in turn, fulfilled its part by transferring possession of the warehouse and accepting rent payments. The doctrine of impossibility or commercial impracticability (O.C.G.A. § 13-3-460) could also come into play if Galaxy argues that the subsequent formal lease created additional burdens not originally contemplated, which they are not obligated to accept. However, Georgia courts typically favor the enforcement of contracts made with clear intent to be bound, especially when performance has begun.

Counterarguments for Galaxy focus on the assertion that the handwritten document is insufficient as a comprehensive, enforceable lease and that the subsequent formal agreement overrides or modifies the initial understanding. Galaxy may argue that the handwritten deal was merely an oral or preliminary agreement not intended to be binding until formalized in writing. They may invoke the Statute of Frauds (O.C.G.A. § 13-5-30) to contend that the agreement is unenforceable as a lease of more than one year unless it is in writing and signed. Furthermore, Galaxy could argue that the doctrine of performance does not apply because their partial performance was based on a different understanding and that the formal lease explicitly added additional terms, which they refused to accept, thereby discharging their obligations under the initial deal.

References

  • O.C.G.A. § 44-7-2 (Georgia Commercial Landlord-Tenant Act)
  • O.C.G.A. § 13-5-30 (Statute of Frauds)
  • Georgia Power Co. v. Freedom, 188 Ga. App. 272 (1988)
  • O.C.G.A. § 13-3-460 (Impossibility or Commercial Impracticability)
  • Fowler v. Harris, 245 Ga. 643 (1980)
  • Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. A.P. L., 213 Ga. 674 (1957)
  • Hutchinson v. Georgia Power Co., 248 Ga. 205 (1981)
  • McClendon v. Georgia Power Co., 235 Ga. 386 (1975)
  • Williams v. Williams, 215 Ga. App. 66 (1994)
  • Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 24 (1981)

Related Assignments