Contracts

This topic is also covered in Prof. Burnham’s CALI lesson The Parol Evidence Rule

Professor Scott Burnham discusses unconscionability, the Williams v. Walker-Thomas case, and reasonable expectations. This podcast is a perfect supplement to Professor Burnham's Unjust Terms (Unconscionability) CALI tutorial.

Choice of law occurs when there is an issue of which jurisdiction’s law the courts will apply to a substantive issue. Choice of law is not a question of where a case will be heard, but instead what law applies when hearing the case. Prof. Burnham discusses how parties can influence what law will apply as well as what restrictions apply when doing so.

This podcast is a question and answer session between Professor Jennifer Martin and a member of CALI's staff. In this podcast, Professor Martin provides advice to students studying acceptance, the mirror image rule and the problem of the Battle of the Forms.

A Question and Answer session with Prof. McFarland, author of several of CALI's lessons in Tort Law and Civil Procedure. Prof. McFarland has been teaching for over 30 years.

Rescission is one of the ways in which contractual duties are discharged. This lesson discusses mutual rescission, rescission by one of the parties, and rescission as a remedy used by a court. This lesson may be used to introduce you to the subject or to review it.

These terms are the building blocks of contracts. This lesson provides an overview of them. After running the lesson, you should be able to distinguish the different terms, recognize them when you find them in a contract, understand the legal effects that follow from their use, and decide which one is appropriate to use when drafting a term in a contract.

This lesson deals with the doctrine of Mitigation of Damages, and examines Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co. The basic issues about mitigation are illustrated in a hypothetical scenario followed by a number of questions.

The lesson takes a look at measuring expectation damages in a sale of goods contract governed by the UCC provisions. The author explains that even though the expectation/mitigation rule is not applicable to the sale of goods contracts, the UCC gives us the same results as common law.

In this lesson you will learn how to calculate damages when the Buyer does not deliver goods or repudiates the contract. First, the author reminds you about the concept of common law mitigation/expectation rule and then contrasts the results with the UCC provisions in this matter.

This lesson is part of a series of lessons that examines contract remedies. It discusses a breach by the buyer. The author deals with problems of measuring damages when the seller does resell the goods (UCC § 2-706), as well as when the goods are not resold (UCC § 2-708(1)).

This lesson is part of a series that examines contract remedies. It covers the situation when the Buyer caused the breach and the UCC § 2-706 and § 2-708(1) are not the right measure of the seller's damages.

For better understanding, you should run this lesson after you complete the lesson Contract Tutorials on Remedies - UCC Damage Rules for Buyers.

This lesson is part of a series that deal with contracts remedies. While proving the damages, a plaintiff has to prove damages with "reasonable certainty." This lesson explores that principle. The author discusses main concepts that explain the term "reasonable certainty" (the "new business rule", "traditional rule" and "current rule"). Examples of liberalization of the proof requirements for damages in the UCC and in the area of "psychic losses" are also covered.

Reliance damages put the non-breaching party back in the same position the party was in before the contract was made. In this lesson, you will explore the distinction between reliance and expectation damages. Both concepts are illustrated by case law.

This lesson explains the concept of liquidated damages. A liquidated damages clause in a contract states what damages the breacher will owe the non-breacher in the event of breach. You will have a chance to familiarize yourself with some sample clauses.

This lesson examines specific performance as a remedy ordered by the court when the money damages will not be adequate.

This lesson discusses cost of completion as a remedy that is awarded when there is work still to be completed under a contract, or when the work called for under the contract was completed improperly. The author explains the relationship between expectation damages and cost of completion remedy.

The lesson addresses the concept of restitution as a remedy alternative to the expectation measure. The author discusses the elements that one has to prove to be awarded restitution. Next, the differences between reliance and restitution are explained.

The lesson begins with explanations of the terms substantial performance and substantial breach, followed by examples of each. The next section discusses factors listed in the Restatement that are taken into consideration when determining whether there has been a substantial breach.

This lesson explains the concept of excuse of performance by referring to K & G Construction Co. v. Harris. The author discusses factors that are taken into consideration when determining whether a breach was substantial and illustrates them in analysis of Walker & Co. v. Harrison.

In this lesson the concept of foreseeability is illustrated by studying Hadley v. Baxendale. The author explains the meaning of the term "reasonably foreseeable" and presents multiple examples. The lesson ends with a several review questions on this subject.