convoluted 2-207 question

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
ogurty
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:16 am

Re: convoluted 2-207 question

Postby ogurty » Wed Dec 08, 2010 7:40 pm

midwesternlife33 wrote:The "confirmations" were sent simultaneously, does this implicate things at all? I would think seller would have an argument that he never assented to the terms of the oral K at all.


Yes, he might, but when the facts of the hypo say "oral K for sale of tigers", it does not mean "there MIGHT be a contract".

midwesternlife33
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 3:23 pm

Re: convoluted 2-207 question

Postby midwesternlife33 » Wed Dec 08, 2010 7:42 pm

ogurty wrote:
midwesternlife33 wrote:The "confirmations" were sent simultaneously, does this implicate things at all? I would think seller would have an argument that he never assented to the terms of the oral K at all.


Yes, he might, but when the facts of the hypo say "oral K for sale of tigers", it does not mean "there MIGHT be a contract".


The facts didn't say that, it went through the entire negotiation, which amounted to what looked like an oral K for the sale of tigers. I didn't want to type out a 3 page fact pattern.

ogurty
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:16 am

Re: convoluted 2-207 question

Postby ogurty » Wed Dec 08, 2010 7:44 pm

midwesternlife33 wrote:
ogurty wrote:
midwesternlife33 wrote:The "confirmations" were sent simultaneously, does this implicate things at all? I would think seller would have an argument that he never assented to the terms of the oral K at all.


Yes, he might, but when the facts of the hypo say "oral K for sale of tigers", it does not mean "there MIGHT be a contract".


The facts didn't say that, it went through the entire negotiation, which amounted to what looked like an oral K for the sale of tigers. I didn't want to type out a 3 page fact pattern.


Then it's a completely different question. Can't oversummarize the facts.

midwesternlife33
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 3:23 pm

Re: convoluted 2-207 question

Postby midwesternlife33 » Wed Dec 08, 2010 7:47 pm

ogurty wrote:
midwesternlife33 wrote:
ogurty wrote:
midwesternlife33 wrote:The "confirmations" were sent simultaneously, does this implicate things at all? I would think seller would have an argument that he never assented to the terms of the oral K at all.


Yes, he might, but when the facts of the hypo say "oral K for sale of tigers", it does not mean "there MIGHT be a contract".


The facts didn't say that, it went through the entire negotiation, which amounted to what looked like an oral K for the sale of tigers. I didn't want to type out a 3 page fact pattern.


Then it's a completely different question. Can't oversummarize the facts.


Right, I wasn't asking for specific answers to my practice question (if I was I would have posted the hypo or something), just looking for pertinent issues and how they hypothetically work out.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: eSpinoza, nunumaster, rockosmodernlife, shineoncrazydiamond, splitterfromhell, TLSreader and 12 guests