Heidi's Journal
My Podcast Link
02/06/2012 13:40 #56033
Nisha & BillCategory: pets
02/03/2012 11:30 #56015
Office elephantCategory: work
Happy bamboo-munching elephant :-)
(e:Terry) tried to install the plant hangers but ran into trouble with it.
We got this fabulous whiteboard cabinet from Buffalo Business Interiors but it needs some special attention before it can be hung. I've been using it anyway, sitting on the floor making pictures & lists. It has corkboards on the insides of the doors and hooks for hanging big pads of paper. It's really my dream whiteboard.
(e:Terry) tried to install the plant hangers but ran into trouble with it.
We got this fabulous whiteboard cabinet from Buffalo Business Interiors but it needs some special attention before it can be hung. I've been using it anyway, sitting on the floor making pictures & lists. It has corkboards on the insides of the doors and hooks for hanging big pads of paper. It's really my dream whiteboard.
01/31/2012 13:27 #56009
Promissory EstoppelCategory: school
I'm reading the info on distinctions between Pennsylvania contract law and common law or Uniform Commercial Code Art. 2 and it includes promissory estoppel, which (e:kookcity2000) thinks is interesting.
Promissory estoppel allows a promisee to enforce a promise against a promisor even when there's no consideration. Consideration is a legal detriment that binds one to a contract. It's usually money for service or product but it could be product for service or something else.
Example: (e:Lilho) promises (e:Paul) that she will give him a year's worth of tortoise food if he stops going out dancing for a month. (e:Paul) thinks this is a good bargain and stops growing dandelions and strawberries for Basra and T2. At the end of the month, (e:Paul) hasn't been dancing but (e:Lilho) laughs and says she wasn't serious. Now Basra and T2 are hungry. Can (e:Paul) sue (e:Lilho) for tortoise food?
Yes! Why?
- Was a contract formed? (e:Lilho) made an offer, (e:Paul) accepted, so yes.
- Was there consideration? (e:Lilho) isn't getting anything for her promise, so no ((e:Paul) not dancing for a month doesn't affect (e:Lilho)'s life although that's what she asked for).
- So why can (e:Paul) sue? Promissory estoppel: Because he relied on (e:Lilho)'s promise by tearing out the dandelion and strawberry garden and an injustice will occur if (e:Lilho)'s promise is not enforced - Basra & T2 would go hungry. Was it reasonably foreseeable (or even just reasonable) that (e:Paul) would rely on the promise? Yes, because (e:Paul) thinks growing tortoise food is a pain.
Promissory estoppel allows a promisee to enforce a promise against a promisor even when there's no consideration. Consideration is a legal detriment that binds one to a contract. It's usually money for service or product but it could be product for service or something else.
Example: (e:Lilho) promises (e:Paul) that she will give him a year's worth of tortoise food if he stops going out dancing for a month. (e:Paul) thinks this is a good bargain and stops growing dandelions and strawberries for Basra and T2. At the end of the month, (e:Paul) hasn't been dancing but (e:Lilho) laughs and says she wasn't serious. Now Basra and T2 are hungry. Can (e:Paul) sue (e:Lilho) for tortoise food?
Yes! Why?
- Was a contract formed? (e:Lilho) made an offer, (e:Paul) accepted, so yes.
- Was there consideration? (e:Lilho) isn't getting anything for her promise, so no ((e:Paul) not dancing for a month doesn't affect (e:Lilho)'s life although that's what she asked for).
- So why can (e:Paul) sue? Promissory estoppel: Because he relied on (e:Lilho)'s promise by tearing out the dandelion and strawberry garden and an injustice will occur if (e:Lilho)'s promise is not enforced - Basra & T2 would go hungry. Was it reasonably foreseeable (or even just reasonable) that (e:Paul) would rely on the promise? Yes, because (e:Paul) thinks growing tortoise food is a pain.
kookcity2000 - 01/31/12 20:30
I do, I love that shit. I would probably love anything distilled to its most interesting points and was still accessible from my couch though.
I do, I love that shit. I would probably love anything distilled to its most interesting points and was still accessible from my couch though.
metalpeter - 01/31/12 19:26
ah so then they are different ok thanks.... Not that I need any legal advice I was just wondering....
ah so then they are different ok thanks.... Not that I need any legal advice I was just wondering....
heidi - 01/31/12 18:48
Oral contracts can be enforceable under certain circumstances. If the value of the contract is over $500 or if it is for one of the following items, it must be in writing: Marriage (like a prenuptual agreement), suretyship, land, contracts than can't be performed within one year, and contracts covered by the Uniform Commercial Code. I was assuming the cost of one year of tortoise food is less than $500.
Oral contracts can be enforceable under certain circumstances. If the value of the contract is over $500 or if it is for one of the following items, it must be in writing: Marriage (like a prenuptual agreement), suretyship, land, contracts than can't be performed within one year, and contracts covered by the Uniform Commercial Code. I was assuming the cost of one year of tortoise food is less than $500.
metalpeter - 01/31/12 18:18
That is pretty interesting.... My legal question is.. Is that the same as what is called and Oral or Verbal Contract?
That is pretty interesting.... My legal question is.. Is that the same as what is called and Oral or Verbal Contract?
01/30/2012 20:16 #56006
Anticipatory RepudiationCategory: school
Sorry, (e:kookcity2000), I already passed through promissory estoppel and didn't write about it. Today's phrase is "anticipatory repudiation". In contracts law, either party can feel a little insecure about whether the transaction is going to happen and demand some reassurance. The other party (P2) has to respond with assurances within 30 days or the first party (P1) can assume that P2 has repudiated the contract.
When P2 has failed to respond or flat out states they don't intend to honor the contract, anticipatory repudiation has occurred. P1 can then seek remedies and doesn't have to follow through on their part of the contract. If P1 doesn't seek remedies, P2 can resume performance (or promise to) and P1 can request assurances that P2 will follow through. P1 is also required to mitigate the consequences of the breach (such as find a different supplier).
When P2 has failed to respond or flat out states they don't intend to honor the contract, anticipatory repudiation has occurred. P1 can then seek remedies and doesn't have to follow through on their part of the contract. If P1 doesn't seek remedies, P2 can resume performance (or promise to) and P1 can request assurances that P2 will follow through. P1 is also required to mitigate the consequences of the breach (such as find a different supplier).
I wish you could do cute things like that with the tortoise.