Big Time Toy MakerLAW-421December 02, 2013Teresa K. Anderson
Running head: BIG TIME TOY MAKER
BIG TIME TOY MAKER
Big Time Toy MakerA contract is an agreement between two parties enforceable in court. To have a valid contract, there are several different elements that must be present. These elements will be explained throughout this analysis. A verbal or written agreement may result in a binding contract if the required contract criteria are met (Melvin, 2011). Contracts are put in place to protect both parties on either end of the agreement. A Big Time Toymaker (BTT) was interested in a new game that was invented by Chou. BTT entered into an agreement with Chou for exclusive ...view middle of the document...
The 90-day deadline had passed with only an oral agreement and the agreement was not drafted until months after BTT sent the initial request. Also, the word "contract" was not present in the e-mail Chou received from BTT.Given the nature of the way business is conducted in today's technology driven world, electronic communication is just as effective as paper communication. The fact that there is not technically a physical piece of paper is not relevant. The e-mail shows an agreement by both parties with the important terms of the distribution agreement made during the meeting. Even though the e-mail never stated the word "contract," this e-mail still shows proves that there was an acknowledged contract between BTT and Chou. Using the Mailbox rule, this e-mail had a name at the bottom of the page is considered a signature on an electronic document (Melvin, 2011)."Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), the statute of frauds applies to any contract for the sale of goods for $500 or more, and any lease transaction for goods amounting to $1,000 or more," (Melvin, 2011, p. 151). Chou received $25,000 under the negotiation agreement, which should be considered under the sale of goods of the Strat game. The e-mail from BTT shows the acknowledged agreement between the two parties with a name at the bottom of the e-mail representing an electronic signature. The issue of Chou being misled by the money, verbal agreement, and the e-mail could also be used in this scenario.BTT cannot get out of this contract with the doctrine of mistake because there was no unilateral mistake (Melvin, 2011). They have not done anything to signify there were any mistakes on the agreements with Chou. Chou may have a unilateral mistake because his 90-days were up in only three days. He managed to obtain an oral agreement with BTT in a timely manner. Before Chou could physically manifest a written agreement, a BTT manager sent him the e-mail confirming the agreed information; he made the mistake of believing this was the contract from BTT.Assuming arguendo the e-mail created a contract between...