Contracts

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
splittermcsplit88
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 10:40 pm

Contracts

Postby splittermcsplit88 » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:03 pm

How do you study for contracts?? Torts has issues and elements that I can lay out, then I can simply apply the facts. But, contracts seems so elusive; restatements and UCC I get it, but which restatements and which UCC do I list? For instance, for acceptance there are:

1. If offeree begins performing, there is acceptance and offeree is bound to complete performance.
2. Unless indicated otherwise, an offer invites performance in any manner and by any medium reasonable in the circumstances.
3. In case of doubt, an offer is interpreted as inviting the offeree to accept either by promising to perform what the offer requests or by rendering performance, as the offeree chooses.

Number 2 seems useless. How would I lay out my IRAC in an exam?

aca0260
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Contracts

Postby aca0260 » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:12 pm

I'm not entirely sure what your question is; however, like Torts, you'll want to answer hypos/fact patterns. This means get your hands on practice tests with answers. Your professors tests are the most useful, then comes E&E/supplement type hypos. Also, #2 in your example is not useless at all. It can be fairly important. There is a good example in the E&E which I'm not going to try to remember. For whatever it's worth, I find contracts to be the most learnable course, particularly if your professor is UCC-focused.

User avatar
minnbills
Posts: 3153
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Contracts

Postby minnbills » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:21 pm

splittermcsplit88 wrote:How do you study for contracts?? Torts has issues and elements that I can lay out, then I can simply apply the facts. But, contracts seems so elusive; restatements and UCC I get it, but which restatements and which UCC do I list? For instance, for acceptance there are:

1. If offeree begins performing, there is acceptance and offeree is bound to complete performance.
2. Unless indicated otherwise, an offer invites performance in any manner and by any medium reasonable in the circumstances.
3. In case of doubt, an offer is interpreted as inviting the offeree to accept either by promising to perform what the offer requests or by rendering performance, as the offeree chooses.

Number 2 seems useless. How would I lay out my IRAC in an exam?


1. Applies to unilateral contracts. The rule is different for unilaterals since they don't want the offer to be yanked half way through performance.

2. Basically the offeror can't say: "even though you performed one way, I really meant for you to do it another, therefore I'm not paying you."

3. Not sure I agree with the way this is stated. For a unilateral contract, the offeree can either perform or manifest an intent to perform. This is so because (again for policy reasons) you don't want the offeree to start performing and then have the offer yanked, plus you want to give the offeree to be able to manifest acceptance because he may have to do preparations and whatnot before actually performing.

Hopefully that's helpful. I'm also a 1L so don't take my word as gospel.

I'm not sure about the exam question, since half my contracts exam is multiple choice. So I'm interested to see what others have to say about that.

User avatar
splittermcsplit88
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 10:40 pm

Re: Contracts

Postby splittermcsplit88 » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:27 pm

My school is having midterms soon, and all we covered is offer, acceptance (promissory, silence, performance), option.

Are there counter-arguments I can make?

User avatar
minnbills
Posts: 3153
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Contracts

Postby minnbills » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:51 pm

splittermcsplit88 wrote:My school is having midterms soon, and all we covered is offer, acceptance (promissory, silence, performance), option.

Are there counter-arguments I can make?


Make counter-arguments based on the facts you're given, when you're applying those facts to the rules.

So, if the fact is:

1. B told his boss, A, that he'd like to go to law school.

2. A replied "go for it, I'll take care of it."

3. B quit his job and went to law school.

4. When the tuition payment came due, B sent the bill to A, who refused to pay.

---

You could then argue both sides, since this is an ambiguous fact set. What does "I'll take care of it" mean? Was it a clear, unambiguous, and definite promise to pay tuition? Or was it just a promise to take care of his work responsibilities?

What you really should do is get a hold of a practice exam and find out what will be expected of you. If your professor hasn't already spoken about it, ask her (everyone else in your class is probably thinking the same thing) about it.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests