Megan LaMare

Business Law
OBrien
Paper 2, Contracts
3/8/17

In the case of Ernst, his lost dream car, and ruined custom suit, but there are minimal

claims for him to make against James Bond or the Aston Martin dealer for his losses. According

to Robert W Emerson, J.D, in his book Business Law, his topic on contracts explains what a

contract is, how it is formed, the requirement of a contract, and other types or contracts, i.e.

promissory estopple, quantum meruit/quasi contracts, and more. Based on the information

provided by Emerson, the evaluation of Ernst and his possible compensation for his losses will

be based on the evaluation of a contract, promissory estopple, or quantum meruit, and if his

claims are categorized as one, and if he requires fair compensation.

James Bond:
In this situation, Ernst saw an advertisement on Graigslist for James Bonds 2014 Aston

Martin with upgrades and modifications, priced at $70,000. After calling Bond, Ernst said that

he would right over to check out the car, and Bond promises to hold it for him until he arrives.

After a ten-hour journey Ernst to the Bond Estate, he learns that Bond has already sold the car to

a higher offer. Ernst now would like Bond to compensate him for the new Aston Martin that he

purchased from a dealer, and the upgrades that he paid for in order for the car to be like Bonds, a

total cost of $100,000.

Contract
A contract is defined as a legally enforceable agreement, express or implied (pg 93),

and in order for there to be a contract there must be an offer, acceptance by all parties,
consideration, capacity, and legal purpose (pg 93-94). First, there must be an offer. The

advertisement that Bond made about the car is not considered an offer, Advertisements are

usually considered to be invitations to deal, this is, invitations to the public to make offers to the

advertiser (pg 100). Due to the fact there was no offer made by Bond, nor an offer made by

Ernst, just a request to look at the car, there is no contract in place between Bond and Ernst.

Without an offer, there can not be acceptance of an offer, there is no consideration without an

offer as there is no something for something (pg 105) in the discussion, there was how ever the

ability for a contract to be made as they were both at the capacity to form a contract, a legally

defined level of mental ability sufficient to reach an agreement (pg 129), and finally the legal

purpose was valid if there had been an offer in place. Without an offer, one of the five

requirements for a contract to be formed, there is no contract in place for Ernst to use against

Bond for selling his car to another bidder.

Promissory Estopple
However, Bond did make a promise to Ernst, stating that he would hold the car for him

until he gets to Bonds to check out the Aston Martin. Promissory estoppel occurs when a

promise is mad without consideration, but the promisee, relying upon the gratuitous promise,

takes certain action, or fails to take action, to his detriment (pg 109). Based on the definition,

the four requirements in promissory estoppel there must be a promise, reliance on the promise,

detriment at the break of the promise, and a required fair compensation. There was a promise

made by Bond to hold to car until Ernst arrived. Ernst traveled two hours form his home, in

helicopter, to look at the Aston Martin, only to find that Bond had already sold the car. Bond

broke his promise to Ernst, which Ernst relied on otherwise he would not have made trip. As a

result, to Ernsts detriment, he lost four hours of his day (two hours of travel to Bonds and two
hours back to his home) and helicopter fuel. As a result, Ernst is entitled to fair compensation.

Based on the evidence provided, promissory estopple fits the issue and Ernst is entitled to

compensation of some kind for his trip.

Quantum Meruit
Quantum meruit is also referred to as an implied-in-law contract or a quasi contract. In

this situation, quantum meruit does not apply, as it is defined as an operation of law in order to

avoid unjust enrichment of on party at the expense of another (pg 95). In order for there to be

quantum meruit, there is no agreement, no meeting of the minds; one party has rendered a

benefit to another under such circumstances that fairness and equity require compensation (pg

95). Ernst could not claim quantum meruit because although there was no agreement, there was

no service or benefit done requiring compensation. The situation does not meet the standards of

quantum meruit.

Remedies
Remedies to the promissory estoppel which was discovered to have been violated, refers

to damages, injunctive relief, reformation, rescission, and specific performance. In this case,

Ernst is asking for Bond to to pay the extra costs that he incurred buying a different Aston

Martin, as well as the upgrades that were required to make the purchased Aston Martin like

Bonds. Due to the fact that there was no contract in place for the Aston Martin, there will be no

compensation for the purchase of the new Aston Martin with the upgrades. Instead, Ernst should

claim for the violation of the promissory estoppel. Ernst could require compensation based on his

damages, compensation due to the nonbreaching party to recover and financial loss or injury

caused by a breach of contract (pg 166). Bond broke the promise, promissory estoppel, by
selling the car before holding it so that Ernst could come check it out. More specifically he

should request compensatory damages, measurable damages to the plaintiff, the court will try to

compensate the plaintiff by awarding a sum of money sufficient to make him/her whole (pg

167). Ernst will need to provide evidence that for: 1. Damages must be proved to a reasonable

certainty. 2. Defendant is liable only for damages that were reasonably foreseeable at the time the

contract was made or at the time the breach occurred, 3. Plaintiff must use every reasonable

effort to mitigate, that is, avoid or minimize, the damages (pg 168). Ernst would be able to

prove that due to the promissory estoppel in place with Bond, that he was in-route to come and

look at the Aston Martin. Second Ernst would able to prove that Bond knew that he was in-route

and that he knew at the time of the breached promise there would be consequences. Finally, as a

result, Ernst should ensure that he mitigates his compensation, only asking for travel costs, and

helicopter fuel costs for breach of the promissory estoppel.

Car Dealer/Suit Damage:

After discovering that Bonds Aston Martin was no longer available, Ernst went to an

Aston Martin dealer where he purchased an Aston Martin. While at the car dealer, Ernst noticed

Ronald Rump stealing a set of car keys and run into the car lot. Ernst was able to stop Ronald

and restrain Ronald until police arrived. In the process, Ernsts $6,000 customized suit from

Saville Row was ruined. Ernst would like for the Aston Martin dealer to reimburse him for the

destroyed suit, which was ruined while trying to help them from a car being stolen.

Contract
In this case, Ernst again does not have a contract in place with the Aston Martin dealer.

The dealer and Ernst did not even share a word about the attempted theft by Ronald. It is known
that in order for there to be a contract in place there must be 1 capacity of the parties. 2 mutual

agreement (assent) or meeting of the minds (a valid offer and acceptance). 3Consideration

(something of value given in exchange for a promise). 4 Legality of subject matter (pg 93-94).

Ernst nor the dealer prosed an offer, and there for there was no acceptance. There was no

consideration due to the fact there was no offer, although there could have been capacity and

legal purpose, but without all five requirement met there can be no contract.

Promissory Estoppel
Ernst knows from the case with Bond that promissory estoppel occurs when a promise is

made without a consideration, but the promisee, relying upon the gratuitous promise, takes

certain action, or fails to take action, to his detriment (pg 109) and requires a promise, reliance

on the promise, detriment, and fair compensation. Promissory Estoppel does not apply because

there was no promise, there was no reliance on the promise, and although the suit was ruined

there was no detriment by the break of the promise so Ernst does not require fair compensation

based on promissory estoppel.

Quantum Meruit
There is potential for Ernst to propose quantum meruit. Quantum meruit is an operation

of law in order to avoid unjust enrichment of on party at the expense of another (pg 95) which

requires there to be no agreement, no meeting of the minds; one party has rendered a benefit to

another under such circumstances that fairness and equity require compensation (pg 95). In this

case there was no agreement nor meeting of the minds, Ernst took action without questioning it,

for the benefit of the Aston Martin dealership when he noticed the attempted robbing. Ernst
saved the dealership from losing $90,000 from Ronald robbing the car, which greatly benefited

dealership. As a result, Ernst is entitled to fair compensation for his ruined suit.

Remedies
Fair compensation for the ruined suit based on the quantum meruit would be for Ernst to

receive compensatory damages, which are measurable damages to the plaintiff, the court will

try to compensate the plaintiff by awarding a sum of money sufficient to make him/her whole

(pg 167). As a result of Ernsts actions, the quantum meruit to protect the dealership, they should

reimburse him the $6,000 for the damages to his suit as a result of his actions for their benefit,

which would make him whole again.

As a result of the both cases, Ernst can state that James Bond violated the promissory

estoppel that they had in place, and request compensatory damages for his travel in the

helicopter, and then can ask for compensatory damages in the form of $6,000 for his act out of

quantum meruit for the Aston Martin dealership. Based on the evaluation of all of the factors,

Ernst will be able to provide a sound case and receive his compensation for his actions.