Effective Use of PAGE \* Arabic 6
Running head: EFFECTIVE USE OF LAWSEffective Use of LawsUniversity of PhoenixBusiness LawBUS/415June 10, 2009Effective Use of LawsEffective use of laws can make the difference between a just or unjust decision. In a review of several contractual issues the separation of each by the different laws which give precedence to the decisions a judge may pass. Using these cases as a catalyst for decision making gives us some idea as to how judges may rule on cases. Several laws that may apply to each scenario however; the correct law for each case is the objective of Team D. Once the law that precedes each case is given an explanation of the choice will foll ...view middle of the document...
Secondly, let's explore selling automobiles' to a minor which is considered a dangerous matter. At the end of the summer, Jeff Fresh needed to return his car to Smooth Sale Used Cars due to his employment running out. Unknowing to Jeff Fresh, he has the "legal right to void or cancel some contracts and not be held liable for others" (ISBA, 2004). One possible outcome should be that the contract is voided out due to Jeff Fresh being a minor. The money he paid towards the promissory note will be returned to him due to the fact he is a minor. The second reason is due to the Smooth Sale Used Car lot salesman neglected to ask him his age. Therefore, a breach of contract would be voided because of the company's negligence.In comparing and contrasting a potential legal and equitable remedy in breaching this contract based on Jeff Fresh's age for this contract to be voided. "The Minor: The Infancy Doctrine law "allows minors to disaffirm (or cancel) most contracts they have entered into with adults. A minor's right to disaffirm a contract is based on public policy" (Cheeseman, 2007)The comparison of a disaffirmance and a necessity of life are based on a minor being extremely responsible versus a minor just getting into a contract just to get in and get out of it. The minor may know his or her rights and how to get out of a contract. The necessity of life is not a good example for this case. There was an exchange of money and product based on Smooth Used Car's salesman not knowing or asking questions of Jeff's age.Next is the law as it is applied to the verbal contract between Harry (the offeror) and Tom (the offeree) or who gets Tom's trains after Tom's retirement in two years. Nothing is in writing. Tom has the right to give his trains to anyone he likes. Tom stated to Harry that he trusted him to take care of the trains. There is no demand made in the verbal offer to Harry to start building a train room. Tom had mentioned offering the trains to Harry without mentioning specifics in writing. Therefore, Harry took it upon himself to build a place for trains which he had not purchased or been given possession of. Harry was not guaranteed the trains. The time put into erecting the building is the point at which Harry should have reassured himself that the trains would be in his possession when Tom retired.The trains are of rare value. Tom obviously did not plan to leave the unique trains with just anyone who wanted them. Care needed to be given to the rare pieces. Tom passed ownership of the trains to David. Harry suing for the trains is acceptable by law but does not imply an illegal act. When Tom mentioned giving the trains away, Harry knew nothing of another possible owner. Tom reacted with silence when Harry told him about building a huge building for the housing of the trains. Tom, by his silence, did not admit a contract with Harry.For a statement to be an actual contract, the contract is either bilateral...
