Sales

This lesson deals with the problem created by the Battle of the Forms. At common law, the mirror image rule requires an acceptance to be exactly like the offer. The rule is reversed under the Uniform Commercial Code, however. Under UCC § 2-207, an acceptance is still an acceptance even though it states different or additional terms from the offer. This lesson will explore the effect of such different or additional terms and when they are operative.

This exercise reviews some substantive principles of contract law and demonstrates the application of that substance to the process of drafting. The exercise begins with a form contract that the user must rewrite to suit the needs of the client. On completion, the user has reviewed applicable principles from both the common law and the U.C.C. In addition, the user has learned principles of drafting that can be applied either to revision of a form or to drafting from scratch.

The goal of this lesson is to take the user systematically through UCC Article 2. The lesson accomplishes this goal by having the user study a contract for the sale of goods. The concepts of Article 2 are thereby seen in the practical setting in which they are applied. Conversely, study of the contract reveals the source of each of the included provisions in the law. The user becomes familiar with the default rules and how those rules might be changed on behalf of a client. The user finishes with knowledge of the Code and how the Code may be applied in practice when drafting a contract.

This lesson deals with the formation of contracts under Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code (excluding § 2-207 issues). Under UCC § 2-204, a contract can be formed in any manner sufficient to show agreement, even if the parties leave open terms. This lesson will explore the effect of the difference in formation between common law and Article 2.

The goal of this program is to teach a substantial amount of Article 2 through the study of a single case. This exercise begins with a warranty case, ITT v. LTX.

A hundred years ago, a law professor said of the parol evidence rule, "There are few things darker than this or fuller of subtle difficulties." Many students and professionals who have studied the rule would agree with that assessment. Hopefully this exercise will illuminate the rule. It does so by examining the functions served by the rule, taking the user through a series of questions that can be used to resolve most issues involving the application of the rule. The Uniform Commercial Code enactment of the rule is examined in detail.

This lesson presents an introduction to the doctrine that the performance of a pre-existing duty, or a promise to perform such a duty, does not constitute a sufficient consideration to make a promise binding. Through questions based on a series of hypothetical cases, underlying reasons for the doctrine are considered, as well as its ramifications in various contexts. Coverage includes: the performance of duties owed to the promise or third parties as consideration; modifications on one side of executory contracts; substituted contracts following rescission; executory accords; satisfaction; liquidated claims and offers to settle unliquidated claims.

This lesson introduces the student to the doctrine and processes involved in interpreting state and federal statutes. Statutes are a critical part of every substantive area of the law, so this is important background for every student, legal professional, lawyer and judge.