preview

Barden V. Ginny Case Summary

Good Essays

issue

The issue is whether the UCC or Common law apply when Helen and Reggie discussed the sale of Reggie’s piano. rule The Universal Commercial Code (UCC) governs transactions in goods, which are all things that are tangible and movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale. analysis Here, the common law, not the UCC, applies because Tom Barden is not selling a good of any kind. issue The issue is whether Joe and John can legally sue Tom, when he informed them he could not afford to send them to boarding school and if they can sue immediately or must wait until September 2012. rule For third party contracts you must identify the players, determine if the third party is a third party beneficiary, determine if the promisors …show more content…

If yes there is a contract. If no, there is no contracts and the third party beneficiaries have no right to sue. analysis Here, Toms contract with Ginny is enforceable because the promise was part of a divorce settlement written in writing, which met the statue of frauds. The divorce settlement was required to be in writing because Tom was to pay tuition and room and board, from September 2012 to May, 2014. The period of payment was for longer than a year, which the statue of frauds requires to be in writing. Tom and Ginny conformed to the statue of frauds and both signed the divorce settlement together, making Toms contract with Ginny enforceable. rule to determine if the third party beneficiary is a creditor beneficiary or a donee beneficiary, we ask if the promisee owes the third party beneficiary a legal obligation binding the promisee and the third party beneficiary.
If yes, then the third party beneficiary is a creditor beneficiary.
If no, then the third party beneficiary is a donee …show more content…

Injured party has right to sue right away. A repudiating party can retract/withdraw the AR, as long as the retraction comes to the injured party’s attention before the injured party materially changes his position in reliance on the repudiation. A non-repudiating party can ignore/waive the AR by putting off their ability to sue immediately and saying they’ll wait till law day to see if the party will perform. A non-repudiating party has an obligation to mitigate damages if there is an AR. A non-repudiating party can provide the repudiating party time to repent the AR. If all that’s left in an agreement is to pay money, AR does not apply; cannot sue until you wait to see if payments will be made. Insolvency is not an AR but a perspective inability to perform. A non-repudiating party may demand assurance for an AR and

Get Access