A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

(Please Ask Questions and Answer Questions)
Rukia Kuchiki
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:50 am

A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby Rukia Kuchiki » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:06 am

Here below is my law homework which makes me confused about solution. Can somebody have some tips or advice to solve this case? Thank you so much!! :D

"Carson, a banker, wishes to start a modern art collection. While passing Derby’s gallery, Carson sees a notice prominently displayed in the window stating ‘Member of the Association of Modern Art Dealers’. A friend in the art trade has advised Carson that he should only buy from an Association member as the Association imposes a strict code of conduct on its members as regards sales to the public.
An hour later, Carson agrees to buy from Derby a painting by an up-and-coming young artist, Fred Smith, at a price of $700,000. Carson is very pleased with his purchase.
One year later, however, Fred Smith’s paintings are no longer fashionable. At the same time, Carson discovers by chance that Derby was not a member of the Association of Modern Art Dealers at the time that Carson purchased the painting. Derby had forgotten to pay his annual subscription and his membership had expired the previous month.
While the price of $700,000 which Carson paid reflected the painting’s market value at that time, the painting is now worth just $100,000. Carson wants to return the painting to Derby and get his money back."
Required:
1. Discuss misrepresentation as a defense in contract formation
2. Advise Carson.

User avatar
seizmaar
Posts: 759
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2014 2:58 pm

Re: A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby seizmaar » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:15 am

Carson's fucked

User avatar
nothingtosee
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am

Re: A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby nothingtosee » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:51 am

This doesn't sound like homework, and if it's part of an exam you should delete this so you don't fail because of the honor code.

Rukia Kuchiki
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:50 am

Re: A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby Rukia Kuchiki » Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:23 am

nothingtosee wrote:This doesn't sound like homework, and if it's part of an exam you should delete this so you don't fail because of the honor code.


This ABSOLUTELY is my homework. Thank you!

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby 20160810 » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:31 pm

Rukia Kuchiki wrote:Here below is my law homework which makes me confused about solution. Can somebody have some tips or advice to solve this case? Thank you so much!! :D

"Carson, a banker, wishes to start a modern art collection. While passing Derby’s gallery, Carson sees a notice prominently displayed in the window stating ‘Member of the Association of Modern Art Dealers’. A friend in the art trade has advised Carson that he should only buy from an Association member as the Association imposes a strict code of conduct on its members as regards sales to the public.
An hour later, Carson agrees to buy from Derby a painting by an up-and-coming young artist, Fred Smith, at a price of $700,000. Carson is very pleased with his purchase.
One year later, however, Fred Smith’s paintings are no longer fashionable. At the same time, Carson discovers by chance that Derby was not a member of the Association of Modern Art Dealers at the time that Carson purchased the painting. Derby had forgotten to pay his annual subscription and his membership had expired the previous month.
While the price of $700,000 which Carson paid reflected the painting’s market value at that time, the painting is now worth just $100,000. Carson wants to return the painting to Derby and get his money back."
Required:
1. Discuss misrepresentation as a defense in contract formation
2. Advise Carson.

This case is factually similar to Marbury v. Madison. Carson is going to need a writ of mandamus, ASAP.

User avatar
mmelittlechicken
Posts: 4680
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 12:34 am

Re: A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby mmelittlechicken » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:33 pm

Rukia Kuchiki wrote:
nothingtosee wrote:This doesn't sound like homework, and if it's part of an exam you should delete this so you don't fail because of the honor code.


This ABSOLUTELY is my homework. Thank you!

It's not in violation of the honor code to have TLS do your homework?

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby 20160810 » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:35 pm

mmelittlechicken wrote:
Rukia Kuchiki wrote:
nothingtosee wrote:This doesn't sound like homework, and if it's part of an exam you should delete this so you don't fail because of the honor code.


This ABSOLUTELY is my homework. Thank you!

It's not in violation of the honor code to have TLS do your homework?

I will die happy if OP turns in his take-home exam with an answer about getting a writ of Pennoyer-style mandamus and still gets kicked out for an honor code violation.

User avatar
banjo
Posts: 1345
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: A case involving misrepresentation in formation of contract

Postby banjo » Wed Dec 17, 2014 1:52 am

OP what are you confused about? Your professor has already identified this for you as a misrepresentation case, so think back to the cases and other provisions you read this semester, argue both sides, and sprinkle in a little policy. There are plenty of facts here for both sides. Seriously, this is a really easy issue spotter.




Return to “Law School FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest