Marilyn Taveras

BLAW
Contract Quiz

Ernst has a valid claim against James due to the following reasons. A contract

was made between the both of them meaning a legally enforceable agreement, express or

implied (pg 93). It does not have to be a written document stating that there was an actual

agreement. There was an offer, which is transmitted directly to the offeree by acts or by words,

whether spoken or written, through any medium whatsoever (pg 99). James had told Ernst that

he would hold the car until he gets there considering the fact Ernst would have given James

money for the car making this consideration. Consideration is any lawful alteration that is

given in exchange for the persons consideration ( pg105). Although advertisements are usually

not considered an offer but are usually considered to be invitations to deal; that it, invitations

to the public to make offers to the advertiser(pg 100).

Because it stated call 1-800-007 and Ernst called him directly and spoke to James about the car

that's where we could see where the offer was technically made. There was never where an

acceptance of the offer clinches the contract (pg 103). The acceptance must be clear and

unqualified(pg 103), where in this situation the acceptance was never said. Promissory

estoppel occurs when a promise is made without any consideration, but the promisee, relying

upon the gratuitous promise, takes certain action or fails to take action, to his detriment( pg

109). This is where James who promised to hold the car until Ernst got there fell back on his

word and sold the car to someone else. There was reliance because Ernst was relying on James to

keep his word and hold the car even if he took a long time getting there. It was not Ernsts fault

for being there late. There was a detriment in this case were the promisee being James causes

damages to Ernst because he refrained from doing what he originally promised to do. There was
no fair compensation related to this because Ernst never got to even see the car let alone be able

to pay for it.

In this situation it would not be considered a quasi contract where it is created by

operation of law in order to avoid unjust enrichment of the minds, one party has rendered a

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

95). There was technically no agreement when it came to Ernst being the one to buy the car

James just promised him that he would hold the car until he got there. But, due to the fact that

because James promised to hold the car, ended up selling it to someone else thus causing Ernst to

not only to ruin his suit,but buying a more expensive car than he originally planned to. Damages

refers to the compensation due to the nonbreaching party to recover any financial loss or injury

caused by a breach of contract ( pg 165). The defendant is liable only for damages that were

reasonably foreseeable at the time the contract was made or at the time the breach occurred (pg

168) , where as soon as James breached the whole agreement that's when things started falling

apart. Ernst should be able to collect some type of money for first of all , everything he went

through with buying a whole new car because he originally thought James was going to sell him

the car. If James did not breach his contract he would not have to give Ernst anything. Also, The

dealership was clearly not keeping track of who was entering it so when Ronald stole the keys

Ernst was not going to not do anything about it so therefore because he helped the dealership out

saving them money he should be compensated to reimburse him. If James would have told Ernst

that he sold the car to someone else he could have avoided all of these problems. Compensatory

damages is the correct word for the way Ernst should be reimbursed by both the dealership and

James. Meaning that in this situation if there has been a material breach of contract and this
breach has caused measurable damages to the plaintiff, the court will try to compensate the

plaintiff awarding a sum of money to make him/her whole (pg 167).