Need some K's help Forum
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Need some K's help
Hi everyone,
Couple questions. I'm trying to figure out how to structure my exam responses and find myself confused. How exactly does consideration relate to offers as opposed to promises?
ex. if you offer me a gator for $100, and I accept promising $100, we have created a bi-k. would you also add a separate paragraph stating my detriment was the $100 for your promise or offer?
Thanks
Couple questions. I'm trying to figure out how to structure my exam responses and find myself confused. How exactly does consideration relate to offers as opposed to promises?
ex. if you offer me a gator for $100, and I accept promising $100, we have created a bi-k. would you also add a separate paragraph stating my detriment was the $100 for your promise or offer?
Thanks
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
you're going too deep there for a timed exam. or too detailed for a line limit example. hit the issue and move on. i think not moving on can really fuck you in the typical issue spotter exam.
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
Thanks! So for offer/acceptance avoid consideration discussion?joobacca wrote:you're going too deep there for a timed exam. or too detailed for a line limit example. hit the issue and move on. i think not moving on can really fuck you in the typical issue spotter exam.
I was thinking it might be more applicable if determining whether there was a promise to make a gift or enforceable promise.
- ggocat
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm
Re: Need some K's help
I guess I would say that your promise to pay $100 was consideration for the seller's promise to sell the Gator.
It's probably not that important, but to me, a statement that you paid consideration "for the offer" would imply an option K. As in, "I'll pay you $100 for the offer to sell me a Gator for $100." In this situation, you're paying a sum to have the option to accept another offer.
It's probably not that important, but to me, a statement that you paid consideration "for the offer" would imply an option K. As in, "I'll pay you $100 for the offer to sell me a Gator for $100." In this situation, you're paying a sum to have the option to accept another offer.
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
no, don't avoid consideration. that's an issue you have to hit. i'm just saying don't dedicate to a separate paragraph that goes way deep into the consideration topic, unless you can pump it very quickly, and it's relevant to the issue at hand. otherwise, move on and get more points by exploring other issues.BCLS wrote:Thanks! So for offer/acceptance avoid consideration discussion?joobacca wrote:you're going too deep there for a timed exam. or too detailed for a line limit example. hit the issue and move on. i think not moving on can really fuck you in the typical issue spotter exam.
I was thinking it might be more applicable if determining whether there was a promise to make a gift or enforceable promise.
i would bet that if consideration is in play (that is, it warrants kind of a detailed analysis) it will only be in play once in an issue-spotter exam.
and yea, if it's applicable then include it. i guess what i'm trying to say is that don't belabor a point/beat a dead horse. there's no benefit because of the opportunity cost. this was a very costly mistake for me first semester. i would hit the max points on a given issue, but i'd miss far more because i didn't have time (or forgot about other issues in my head while just beating the hell out an issue).
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- ggocat
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm
Re: Need some K's help
Write for your professor. K especially is one of those classes where you really should try to know how your prof wants the exam. Some profs want you to go through a checklist for every K and discuss everything, even if the facts don't suggest there is a real issue. Others don't. It really depends. Err on the side of being inclusive.BCLS wrote:Thanks! So for offer/acceptance avoid consideration discussion?joobacca wrote:you're going too deep there for a timed exam. or too detailed for a line limit example. hit the issue and move on. i think not moving on can really fuck you in the typical issue spotter exam.
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
So can you guys give me an example as to how you would structure an exam answer that has to do with offer/acceptance?
Should I stick with
1. was there an offer?
2. was it accepted?
or
1.
2.
and 3. was there consideration for the offer?
Should I stick with
1. was there an offer?
2. was it accepted?
or
1.
2.
and 3. was there consideration for the offer?
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
thanks guys! I guess I'm just not sure how consideration fits into the offer/acceptance arena?
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
this is consistent with i'm saying. if a professor talks about a topic (for example, a certain remedy that he thought would have been more appropriate in a case you read), then, of course, you're going to explore that more thoroughly than other stuff. but don't try to parrot your professor. let the facts determine how you think something should be resolved (IF your professor is the type of person who wants you to resolve issues. some just want you to spot an issue, argue both sides, and move on).ggocat wrote:Write for your professor. K especially is one of those classes where you really should try to know how your prof wants the exam. Some profs want you to go through a checklist for every K and discuss everything, even if the facts don't suggest there is a real issue. Others don't. It really depends. Err on the side of being inclusive.BCLS wrote:Thanks! So for offer/acceptance avoid consideration discussion?joobacca wrote:you're going too deep there for a timed exam. or too detailed for a line limit example. hit the issue and move on. i think not moving on can really fuck you in the typical issue spotter exam.
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
you need consideration for a contract, right?
and O/A is the mechanism that forms a K/binds the parties, right?
or am i way off...?
edit: i'm talking in general terms, and not thinking about stuff like promissory estoppel.
and O/A is the mechanism that forms a K/binds the parties, right?
or am i way off...?
edit: i'm talking in general terms, and not thinking about stuff like promissory estoppel.
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
This is where I'm confused.
An offer is technically a promise, so above my offer to sell the gator is a promise to sell it, so long as you provide $100. I think the offer would still have to be supported by consideration right? So that means you and I need to suffer a legal detriment (mine is the offer, yours is the $100 payment). Is this at all correct?
An offer is technically a promise, so above my offer to sell the gator is a promise to sell it, so long as you provide $100. I think the offer would still have to be supported by consideration right? So that means you and I need to suffer a legal detriment (mine is the offer, yours is the $100 payment). Is this at all correct?
- OGR3
- Posts: 881
- Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Re: Need some K's help
You should include consideration.BCLS wrote:So can you guys give me an example as to how you would structure an exam answer that has to do with offer/acceptance?
Should I stick with
1. was there an offer?
2. was it accepted?
or
1.
2.
and 3. was there consideration for the offer?
This is my default method for doing so from a practice exam. It takes like five seconds.
There was consideration (benefit to the promisor OR detriment to the promisee AND bargained for exchange) for the promise. The promisee, A, would give the Promisor, B, money for services provided (something not required by law and as such, a detriment). The bargained-for-exchange was the exchange of services provided for money (The promise must induce the detriment and the detriment must be the inducement for the promise).
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
OGR3 wrote:You should include consideration.BCLS wrote:So can you guys give me an example as to how you would structure an exam answer that has to do with offer/acceptance?
Should I stick with
1. was there an offer?
2. was it accepted?
or
1.
2.
and 3. was there consideration for the offer?
This is my default method for doing so from a practice exam. It takes like five seconds.
There was consideration (benefit to the promisor OR detriment to the promisee AND bargained for exchange) for the promise. The promisee, A, would give the Promisor, B, money for services provided (something not required by law and as such, a detriment). The bargained-for-exchange was the exchange of services provided for money (The promise must induce the detriment and the detriment must be the inducement for the promise).
I like this! Thanks a ton. But one question. How do you do this in the context of offeror/offeree?
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- OGR3
- Posts: 881
- Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Re: Need some K's help
Offeror=promisor; Offeree=promiseeBCLS wrote:OGR3 wrote:You should include consideration.BCLS wrote:So can you guys give me an example as to how you would structure an exam answer that has to do with offer/acceptance?
Should I stick with
1. was there an offer?
2. was it accepted?
or
1.
2.
and 3. was there consideration for the offer?
This is my default method for doing so from a practice exam. It takes like five seconds.
There was consideration (benefit to the promisor OR detriment to the promisee AND bargained for exchange) for the promise. The promisee, A, would give the Promisor, B, money for services provided (something not required by law and as such, a detriment). The bargained-for-exchange was the exchange of services provided for money (The promise must induce the detriment and the detriment must be the inducement for the promise).
I like this! Thanks a ton. But one question. How do you do this in the context of offeror/offeree?
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
i never really thought of it that way.BCLS wrote:This is where I'm confused.
An offer is technically a promise, so above my offer to sell the gator is a promise to sell it, so long as you provide $100. I think the offer would still have to be supported by consideration right? So that means you and I need to suffer a legal detriment (mine is the offer, yours is the $100 payment). Is this at all correct?
offeror is master of his offer. once he let's offer go, he can't really do anything except through a proper revocation. i assume the justification is that he had complete control of his own offer before he made it.
once offeree accepts, both are bound (excluding things like mistake, etc.). a K has been formed. the consideration is gator and 100 dollars. since there is proper O/A binds offeree/offeror to those terms.
no? i think i'm kind of confused by your question
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
Ah ok I'm beginning to see this. Thanks a ton for walking me through this lol.
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
Ok so what you are saying is to keep the separate.joobacca wrote:i never really thought of it that way.BCLS wrote:This is where I'm confused.
An offer is technically a promise, so above my offer to sell the gator is a promise to sell it, so long as you provide $100. I think the offer would still have to be supported by consideration right? So that means you and I need to suffer a legal detriment (mine is the offer, yours is the $100 payment). Is this at all correct?
offeror is master of his offer. once he let's offer go, he can't really do anything except through a proper revocation. i assume the justification is that he had complete control of his own offer before he made it.
once offeree accepts, both are bound (excluding things like mistake, etc.). a K has been formed. the consideration is gator and 100 dollars. since there is proper O/A binds offeree/offeror to those terms.
no? i think i'm kind of confused by your question
Scenario 1: I PROMISE $100 to you if you refrain from drinking for a year. This is enforceable as a promise because there is consideration
Scenario 2: I offer you $100 in exchange for you to promise not to drink for a year. offer ofr Bi-K and is acceptance once you make your promise. No consideration analysis needed?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
ok, i think i get what you're saying. my brain is kind of friend right now. first, i haven't taken K in a year, so be careful with what i say.BCLS wrote:Ok so what you are saying is to keep the separate.joobacca wrote:i never really thought of it that way.BCLS wrote:This is where I'm confused.
An offer is technically a promise, so above my offer to sell the gator is a promise to sell it, so long as you provide $100. I think the offer would still have to be supported by consideration right? So that means you and I need to suffer a legal detriment (mine is the offer, yours is the $100 payment). Is this at all correct?
offeror is master of his offer. once he let's offer go, he can't really do anything except through a proper revocation. i assume the justification is that he had complete control of his own offer before he made it.
once offeree accepts, both are bound (excluding things like mistake, etc.). a K has been formed. the consideration is gator and 100 dollars. since there is proper O/A binds offeree/offeror to those terms.
no? i think i'm kind of confused by your question
Scenario 1: I PROMISE $100 to you if you refrain from drinking for a year. This is enforceable as a promise because there is consideration
Scenario 2: I offer you $100 in exchange for you to promise not to drink for a year. offer ofr Bi-K and is acceptance once you make your promise. No consideration analysis needed?
this is how i approached my K exam. i would talk about O/A. if there are no real issues, then i'd mention that.
then i'd talk about consideration. for the second one, yes, i would definitely mention that legal detriment counts as consideration. so the K is supported by consideration. i assume this is the self-righteous uncle offering his nephew a nice payday to abstain from all fun activities case, right?
i mean, how to kill or support something isn't really that important i think. it's wehther you do it properly.
if mechanism of O/A is good, then it's good, i think. if the consideration is bad, then it's bad and that's what kills the K. you can just discuss it like that (separately) or just combine it. whatever you approach you take shouldn't matter as long as it's all discussed.
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
thanks! so bottom line- talk about consideration during O/A?joobacca wrote:ok, i think i get what you're saying. my brain is kind of friend right now. first, i haven't taken K in a year, so be careful with what i say.BCLS wrote:Ok so what you are saying is to keep the separate.joobacca wrote:i never really thought of it that way.BCLS wrote:This is where I'm confused.
An offer is technically a promise, so above my offer to sell the gator is a promise to sell it, so long as you provide $100. I think the offer would still have to be supported by consideration right? So that means you and I need to suffer a legal detriment (mine is the offer, yours is the $100 payment). Is this at all correct?
offeror is master of his offer. once he let's offer go, he can't really do anything except through a proper revocation. i assume the justification is that he had complete control of his own offer before he made it.
once offeree accepts, both are bound (excluding things like mistake, etc.). a K has been formed. the consideration is gator and 100 dollars. since there is proper O/A binds offeree/offeror to those terms.
no? i think i'm kind of confused by your question
Scenario 1: I PROMISE $100 to you if you refrain from drinking for a year. This is enforceable as a promise because there is consideration
Scenario 2: I offer you $100 in exchange for you to promise not to drink for a year. offer ofr Bi-K and is acceptance once you make your promise. No consideration analysis needed?
this is how i approached my K exam. i would talk about O/A. if there are no real issues, then i'd mention that.
then i'd talk about consideration. for the second one, yes, i would definitely mention that legal detriment counts as consideration. so the K is supported by consideration. i assume this is the self-righteous uncle offering his nephew a nice payday to abstain from all fun activities case, right?
i mean, how to kill or support something isn't really that important i think. it's wehther you do it properly.
if mechanism of O/A is good, then it's good, i think. if the consideration is bad, then it's bad and that's what kills the K. you can just discuss it like that (separately) or just combine it. whatever you approach you take shouldn't matter as long as it's all discussed.
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
if you want to. they are separate things though, but there's no problem in discussing them together. i mix and mash all the time because i write more and hit more issues that way. my brain isn't organized or capable enough to break things down discretely. but if you're the type of person who breaks down things into underlined/semi-coloned sections, then, technically, i think O/A should be separate from consideraiton. i would discuss O/A first, whether the actual things that happened satisfy O/A. then i would discuss any issues with consideration.
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
thanks a ton!joobacca wrote:if you want to. they are separate things though, but there's no problem in discussing them together. i mix and mash all the time because i write more and hit more issues that way. my brain isn't organized or capable enough to break things down discretely. but if you're the type of person who breaks down things into underlined/semi-coloned sections, then, technically, i think O/A should be separate from consideraiton. i would discuss O/A first, whether the actual things that happened satisfy O/A. then i would discuss any issues with consideration.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- evilxs
- Posts: 396
- Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:21 pm
Re: Need some K's help
ok. They are separate topics but when you are writing about offer it is appropriate to hit on consideration because a valid offer includes a bargained for exchange. The exchange is typically the consideration and the legal benefit/detriment should be present or you have no contract.
Two of the above posters mentioned TCR. Write for your professor. Write for the call of the question. If it asks, is there a valid contract? You must give at least a one sentence response to if there is consideration.
And on my K final there was only one question where I had to write that yes there was consideration present. Other questions had a different call to them. I had one on statute of frauds for merchants, etc.
Two of the above posters mentioned TCR. Write for your professor. Write for the call of the question. If it asks, is there a valid contract? You must give at least a one sentence response to if there is consideration.
And on my K final there was only one question where I had to write that yes there was consideration present. Other questions had a different call to them. I had one on statute of frauds for merchants, etc.
-
- Posts: 555
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am
Re: Need some K's help
Thanks guys!!evilxs wrote:ok. They are separate topics but when you are writing about offer it is appropriate to hit on consideration because a valid offer includes a bargained for exchange. The exchange is typically the consideration and the legal benefit/detriment should be present or you have no contract.
Two of the above posters mentioned TCR. Write for your professor. Write for the call of the question. If it asks, is there a valid contract? You must give at least a one sentence response to if there is consideration.
And on my K final there was only one question where I had to write that yes there was consideration present. Other questions had a different call to them. I had one on statute of frauds for merchants, etc.
Quick question: IF I promise to give you 5,000 to go to college, and there is no consideration, but you substantially rely, we would use Section 90 promissory estoppel to attempt to enforce the promise even though there is no consideration
Second, if I make you an offer for a gator for $100, and you go out an buy a pen for it, and I revoke, we would use 87(2) to make the offer an option K (assuming I should have reasonably known it would result in substantial relaince on your part)
Sound about right?
you guys are saving my ass
- joobacca
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Need some K's help
Q1:
That totally depends. Are you a shithead? Then my reliance is not reasonable. Did I help you cheat on your LSAT and law exams? Then, again, no. Are you a priest? That certainly helps. Just go through the elements of promissory estoppel, and remember (in every K situation) the capacities and capabilities or the parties that they possess independently or because of prior relationships, and other shit.
I think without more facts that would warrant "reasonable reliance" this sounds like a promise of a gift, which is jackshit.
Q2:
I had to look up the Restatement. It says:
(2) An offer which the offeror should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance of a substantial character on the part of the offeree before acceptance and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding as an option contract to the extent necessary to avoid injustice.
My take: no.
That totally depends. Are you a shithead? Then my reliance is not reasonable. Did I help you cheat on your LSAT and law exams? Then, again, no. Are you a priest? That certainly helps. Just go through the elements of promissory estoppel, and remember (in every K situation) the capacities and capabilities or the parties that they possess independently or because of prior relationships, and other shit.
I think without more facts that would warrant "reasonable reliance" this sounds like a promise of a gift, which is jackshit.
Q2:
I had to look up the Restatement. It says:
(2) An offer which the offeror should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance of a substantial character on the part of the offeree before acceptance and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding as an option contract to the extent necessary to avoid injustice.
My take: no.
- Chupavida
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:37 pm
Re: Need some K's help
.
Last edited by Chupavida on Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login