Harvard Class of 2012 Forum

[Krswmact]

I agree Warren had solid logic in his opinion. It was 8-1, I dont know why we didnt receive a dissent.

[excitedutterance]

We do. And I'm in a computer lab on campus editing a video for class, and I no longer have the case in front of me (though it would not be hard to get), which is my convenient excuse not to engage you further in this argument.

...but for these:

There is no reasonable expectation, in the lack of explicit provision to the effect, that a contractor need go to the ends of the earth in ensuring the complete and total accuracy of the fulfillment of his contract. A line is drawn somewhere. I see the plaintiff as having met and exceeded that line.

Consider the possibility that you had contracted (for some reason) with a doctor that for a severe lung infection you would receive Zithromax (Azithromycin). The Doctor, being a nice woman, goes to the pharmacy for you and gets your Zithromax, looks at the bottle, which says Zithromax, and looks at the pills, which each say Zithromax. The Doctor then gives you the Zithromax, and you take it. Your infection lessens but continues, so the doctor repeats his order for Zithromax, which is filled in the same bottle. However, this time he does not check each of the pills individually. Lo and behold, the pharmacist gave you the generic, Azithromycin--structurally identical down to the very molecule, EXCEPT for the name stamped on it. In fact, you were just taking Azithromycin to begin with; it just had a different name on it. You take the pills, and your lung infection goes away.

On learning that the pills were absolutely identical, but had a different name on them, do you demand to be re-infected?

Simply because Smith does not provide for the idea of a reasonable error made after due precautions against such an error were taken--an error that does not affect the outcome of the contract: the structural integrity, the value of the product used, the real value of the property, et cetera--does not mean that reasonable interpretation of case law cited in the majority does not provide for this interpretation.

If the contract had specified a type of nail, it would not have bean reasonable to expect that the contractor inspect each of the 10,000 nails individually if the first 2,000 were inspected and found to be of the proper origin. If it had specified a type of front door, it would have been egregious not to see if the wrong door had been installed. There is a line somewhere between those actions, and inspecting over 2000 feet of pipe after the entire original order, a substantial fraction, was assessed to be of the proper origin, falls beyond the limits of what a contractor need do to fulfill the terms of his contract.

(I really don't want to work on this video.)

[Krswmact]

So I was forwarded the Jacob case and will join in on the debate. I only just skimmed it but Ill give my two cents. The main issue in the case in my perspective is not whether the contract was fulfilled or not; it obviously wasnt and the plaintiff acknowledges it. In addition, I feel that whether it was intentional or not does not negate that the contract was not fulfilled. The issue is what is the proper remedy of this broken contract. Should the remedy be the costs required to give the plaintiff what they wanted in the first place, or just the difference in value. The majority argues that we should follow the second remedy--since the new pipe was just as good, there was no difference. But I think I agree with the dissent which says that the remedy is the cost required to give the plaintiff what they wanted.

[Krswmact]

Say the defendant wanted reading pipe for a very specific purpose not mentioned. It should now be his burden to pay to redo everything in order to get what he had previously contracted someone to take care of for him? On top of that the defendant also needs to fulfill his side of the previously uncompleted contract?

But also if I/we knew the exact ruling of the cases that are at the end of the majority-- "The owner is entitlted to the money which will permit him to complete, unless the cost of competion is grossly and unfairly out of proportion to the good to be attained" ---and other set precedents etc...opinions would probably change.

[excitedutterance]

Say the defendant wanted reading pipe for a very specific purpose not mentioned. It should now be his burden to pay to redo everything in order to get what he had previously contracted someone to take care of for him?

All other things being equal, if the defendant can show that this very specific purpose cannot be fulfilled with any other type of pipe, the defendant is entitled to compensation. The defendant has not shown that, though the burden of proof was his. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the court rightly found that the unfortunate error of supplying other brands of pipe has not caused any present or reasonably foreseeable future damage to the defendant's person or chattel. Insofar as the plaintiff took sufficient steps to prevent the error at hand--and I side with the court in saying that he did--and considering that the cost of replacing the pipe when no clear compelling reason for doing so (and whim does not seem to amount to that, despite the stipulation of the contract) is exorbitant, the plaintiff should receive his payment less the difference in value of the brands of pipes, which is none, or the reduction in real value of the defendant's property, which is none.

[Objection]

Consider the possibility that you had contracted (for some reason) with a doctor that for a severe lung infection you would receive Zithromax (Azithromycin). The Doctor, being a nice woman, goes to the pharmacy for you and gets your Zithromax, looks at the bottle, which says Zithromax, and looks at the pills, which each say Zithromax. The Doctor then gives you the Zithromax, and you take it. Your infection lessens but continues, so the doctor repeats his order for Zithromax, which is filled in the same bottle. However, this time he does not check each of the pills individually. Lo and behold, the pharmacist gave you the generic, Azithromycin--structurally identical down to the very molecule, EXCEPT for the name stamped on it. In fact, you were just taking Azithromycin to begin with; it just had a different name on it. You take the pills, and your lung infection goes away.

On learning that the pills were absolutely identical, but had a different name on them, do you demand to be re-infected?

The situation is not comparable. In your hypothetical, the doctor prescribes Zithromax. You presumably have no preference, nor are you entered into a binding contract with the doctor for only Zithtromax. The fact the pills were identical is irrelevant since you had no preference on way or the other.

But for the sake of argument, let's say you did. There is no remedy. The infection is gone. The mistake is not fixable.

In our case, the mistake is certainly fixable. Kent is not asking for any sort of damages beyond what is required to complete the job. Kent is essentially just asking for the contract to be honored as written and agreed to. He's not saying, "You messed up. Now pay me for messing up." He's saying, "You messed up, but a contract is a contract, so complete it as promised, or else pay me the amount I would need to get it done." It's not unreasonable for Kent to want the contract fulfilled as agreed to.

Does it suck for the contractor? Sure. They'll probably end up working for 2x more than what they're being paid. But that's the nature of the beast.

If the contract had specified a type of nail, it would not have bean reasonable to expect that the contractor inspect each of the 10,000 nails individually if the first 2,000 were inspected and found to be of the proper origin. If it had specified a type of front door, it would have been egregious not to see if the wrong door had been installed. There is a line somewhere between those actions, and inspecting over 2000 feet of pipe after the entire original order, a substantial fraction, was assessed to be of the proper origin, falls beyond the limits of what a contractor need do to fulfill the terms of his contract.

It absolutely would be reasonable, because upon agreeing to the contract, the contractor should have realized that inspection of all 10,000 nails (or, in this case, all 2,500 feet of pipe) would be required in order to be sure he was satisfying the contract. If he had a problem with this, he could have either upped the price (more work = more $) or simply not taken the contract. He agreed to the contract, however, and his lack of foresight, coupled with the "inattention and oversight" of the sub-contractor, is now costing him. He took a leap of faith and hit a rock.

It was his responsibility to do everything in his power to make sure he fulfilled his obligations. I find that inspecting only some of the pipe and assuming the rest would be the same to be a breach of his obligations to the contract.


Edit: Clarified a point made earlier in the post.

Edit 2: I can't wait to see how this plays out in the mock class. Looks like they accomplished their goal!

[excitedutterance]

Haha, I'm watching stepford wives in a computer lab and reading our discussion.

[Objection]

Haha, I'm watching stepford wives in a computer lab and reading our discussion.

I'm about to take a nap!

[Pumpkin]

hey who do you guys think is going to be at the welcoming reception on sat evening of the admitted student weekend? trying to decide whether to go up early sat just for that and am figuring if there aren't faculty/current students and it's just for admits, i could get my fill the next two days.. thoughts?

[Objection]

Oh suck it up and wake up early

[Pumpkin]

eh, having just hit up columbia/nyu asw, making small talk with people who probably won't end up being your classmates gets old pretty fast. then again, maybe different at harvard since so many people will go there

[iagolives]

Oh suck it up and wake up early

I agree. You won't remember those extra hours of sleep but what you WILL remember is if it was someone cool and you missed it.

[Objection]

Those who were assigned the Terry v. Ohio case, this was posted (LinkRemoved) on the HLS blog a few days ago.

[Haribo]

Sounds like there is at least a two week delay for financial aid awards to start coming out, due to the state of the economy.

Also, I'm jealous of all you guys going to ASW! Take pictures + report back for those of us "stuck" in crazy foreign countries or otherwise unable to attend!

[iagolives]

Sounds like there is at least a two week delay for financial aid awards to start coming out, due to the state of the economy.

Also, I'm jealous of all you guys going to ASW! Take pictures + report back for those of us "stuck" in crazy foreign countries or otherwise unable to attend!

Will do, as long as you bring us some gummy bears. Every time I see your avatar, my sweet tooth starts getting hungry!

[ramblin'man]

*

[Anonymous0L]

Are they doing the Pass/No pass thing for all classes like Yale finally this year?

[totalidiot]

I'm torn between wanting to meet future classmates and crossing the Mason-Dixon line for the first time in my life and saving 1k that I can always put towards student debt. I'm thinking that I'm going to opt for the latter. Thoughts on this? I'm pretty dead-set on HLS, so I don't think the weekend will really convince me one way or the other, as I'm already convinced . Hopefully, this won't turn out to be a huge mistake.

[masterpinky0509]

Are they doing the Pass/No pass thing for all classes like Yale finally this year?

They are switching to a system that will be High Pass/Pass/Low Pass/Fail, i.e. it will basically be an A/B/C/F system. It's not that different than what they used to do, Harvard students would probably have a gigantic collective brain-death if they couldn't figure out a way to rank themselves.

Btw, Yale is not P/NP for all classes, that's just for your first semester there. Afterwards, you are graded on the HP/P/LP/F system, though I understand Yale to be more relaxed and less competitive than Harvard.

[masterpinky0509]

I'm torn between wanting to meet future classmates and crossing the Mason-Dixon line for the first time in my life and saving 1k that I can always put towards student debt. I'm thinking that I'm going to opt for the latter. Thoughts on this? I'm pretty dead-set on HLS, so I don't think the weekend will really convince me one way or the other, as I'm already convinced . Hopefully, this won't turn out to be a huge mistake.

Yeah, I'm with you. Harvard's pretty stingy on travel money ... it would be something like $400-500 out of pocket with travel and hotel expenses included, so I think I'm just going to skip out.

[Objection]

You're shelling out $200k for law school.

The money to visit is insignificant.

My $0.02

[pfflyer28]

Im sure its been asked before but what exactly is the consensus on attire for admitted students weekend? Obviously these are really relaxed events? Do you think most people will be casual or will it be a bit more formal (khakis/button down)? Im totally fine with going in jeans and a polo shirt but as much as I would like to not care, I'd hate to be one of the few among a sea of more formally dressed people.

[treple]

I'll be in jeans.

[Objection]

I'll be in jeans as well.

[iagolives]

I think the consensus is to wear what you would usually wear. You will be meeting a lot of the people with whom you'll be going to school with for three years and, since clothes say a lot about a person, I think you will want to be true to yourself from day 1. I am one who likes the whole collared shirt and khaki thing but, if that isn't for you, wear something comfortable.