Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract" Forum
- introversional
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:59 am
Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
Why? Because it'll be amusing to see how many variations of the same fundamental term are out there... "consideration" would be a good one too.
-
- Posts: 1932
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:30 am
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
Legally enforceable promise
Bargained-for exchange
Bargained-for exchange
- jacketman03
- Posts: 763
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 3:44 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
What shock said.shock259 wrote:Legally enforceable promise
Bargained-for exchange
- introversional
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:59 am
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
Wow, mine prefers "mutual manifestation of assent to an exchange between two or more parties that is also legally enforceable."shock259 wrote:Legally enforceable promise
Bargained-for exchange
- jacketman03
- Posts: 763
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 3:44 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
That just seems a bit unnecessarily wordy to me.introversional wrote:Wow, mine prefers "mutual manifestation of assent to an exchange between two or more parties that is also legally enforceable."shock259 wrote:Legally enforceable promise
Bargained-for exchange
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 531
- Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 5:56 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
I don't know and courts don't either
-
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:26 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
an agreement enforceable by law
- MrPapagiorgio
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:36 am
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
Contract: a bargain for exchange which has consideration, manifestation of mutual assent and certainty of terms in which the parties are liable under the law.
Consideration: rendering performance or promise to perform.
Full disclosure: prof faps to the restatement.
Consideration: rendering performance or promise to perform.
Full disclosure: prof faps to the restatement.
Last edited by MrPapagiorgio on Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 605
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:40 am
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
A 1997 science-fiction movie starring Jodie Foster
- shepdawg
- Posts: 477
- Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:00 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
My old Ks prof defines a contract as "A promise or set of promises for the breach of which the law provides remedy."
Last edited by shepdawg on Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
- ben4847
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:38 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
A non-tort liability.
- Bronte
- Posts: 2125
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action. The credited definition is a promise or set of promises the breach of which has a legal remedy, like shepdawg said.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
- AlexanderSupertramp
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 10:30 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
An agreement with a legal effect.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- ben4847
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:38 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
No, because my tort professor defined tort as a non-contract liability. So I guess those are all torts.Bronte wrote:That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
- 5ky
- Posts: 10835
- Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:10 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
oh dearben4847 wrote:No, because my tort professor defined tort as a non-contract liability. So I guess those are all torts.Bronte wrote:That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
- ben4847
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:38 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
That is not a good definition, because there are contracts which are not based on any promise; that is when they are implied in law.Bronte wrote:That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action. The credited definition is a promise or set of promises the breach of which has a legal remedy, like shepdawg said.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
That is why my definition is superior, since it encompasses any liability imposed which is not based on tort theories.
- Bronte
- Posts: 2125
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
The title of the thread wasn't "Disagree with other's prof's definitions of contracts," but I'm going to anyway. This definition is also overly broad. It would include, for example, an enforceable agreement that nevertheless had legal effects. For example, an agreement to rob a bank is not a contract because it's unenforceable, but it nevertheless has the legal affect of exposing the counterparties to criminal liability. It's also overly narrow because it excludes nonagreements enforceable based on reliance, which are considered a part of modern contract law.AlexanderSupertramp wrote:An agreement with a legal effect.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- kwais
- Posts: 1675
- Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
my contracts professor doesn't teach contracts. We do economics, graphs, formulas. We have his exam next week. We have not learned consideration.
- Bronte
- Posts: 2125
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
I've already explained why your definition doesn't work. It's absurdly over broad. Your response, which I thought was a joke, was that a tort is noncontractual liability. Crimes are definitely not torts and a variety of other civil liability is almost certainly not tort liability.ben4847 wrote:That is not a good definition, because there are contracts which are not based on any promise; that is when they are implied in law.Bronte wrote:That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action. The credited definition is a promise or set of promises the breach of which has a legal remedy, like shepdawg said.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
That is why my definition is superior, since it encompasses any liability imposed which is not based on tort theories.
As to contracts "implied in law," they arise out of implied promises, so they're not excluded from that definition.
- ben4847
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:38 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
I think crimes are torts. Assault is a tort, even though it is also a crime. We had a plaintiff's lawyer who sues corporations in M & A deals tell us he was practicing torts, in class today.Bronte wrote:I've already explained why your definition doesn't work. It's absurdly over broad. Your response, which I thought was a joke, was that a tort is noncontractual liability. Crimes are definitely not torts and a variety of other civil liability is almost certainly not tort liability.ben4847 wrote:That is not a good definition, because there are contracts which are not based on any promise; that is when they are implied in law.Bronte wrote:That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action. The credited definition is a promise or set of promises the breach of which has a legal remedy, like shepdawg said.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
That is why my definition is superior, since it encompasses any liability imposed which is not based on tort theories.
As to contracts "implied in law," they arise out of implied promises, so they're not excluded from that definition.
And you will have a hard time imagining that a contract implied in law is an implied promise in any sense except that some judges thought you ought to pay.
-
- Posts: 4249
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
Does that mean that replevin is a contract action in your "superior" definition? What about a child custody suit?ben4847 wrote:That is not a good definition, because there are contracts which are not based on any promise; that is when they are implied in law.Bronte wrote:That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action. The credited definition is a promise or set of promises the breach of which has a legal remedy, like shepdawg said.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
That is why my definition is superior, since it encompasses any liability imposed which is not based on tort theories.
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
- 5ky
- Posts: 10835
- Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:10 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
You have no idea what you're talking about.ben4847 wrote:
I think crimes are torts. Assault is a tort, even though it is also a crime. We had a plaintiff's lawyer who sues corporations in M & A deals tell us he was practicing torts, in class today.
And you will have a hard time imagining that a contract implied in law is an implied promise in any sense except that some judges thought you ought to pay.
-
- Posts: 4249
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
Also, this.5ky wrote:You have no idea what you're talking about.ben4847 wrote:
I think crimes are torts. Assault is a tort, even though it is also a crime. We had a plaintiff's lawyer who sues corporations in M & A deals tell us he was practicing torts, in class today.
And you will have a hard time imagining that a contract implied in law is an implied promise in any sense except that some judges thought you ought to pay.
- Bronte
- Posts: 2125
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
Crimes are not torts. Some crimes and torts share the same name. And some actions give rise to both criminal and tort liability, but crimes are not torts. Contracts "implied in law" are a legal fiction either way. It's no harder to "imagine" them as contracts than it is to imagine them as implied contracts.ben4847 wrote:I think crimes are torts. Assault is a tort, even though it is also a crime. We had a plaintiff's lawyer who sues corporations in M & A deals tell us he was practicing torts, in class today.
And you will have a hard time imagining that a contract implied in law is an implied promise in any sense except that some judges thought you ought to pay.
- ben4847
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:38 pm
Re: Post your contracts Profs preferred definition of "contract"
replevin is a contract in my definition. I quote the case of Sherwood v. Walker which begins "Replevin for a cow" (you may have read it in regard to mistake in contracts)Renzo wrote:Does that mean that replevin is a contract action in your "superior" definition? What about a child custody suit?ben4847 wrote:That is not a good definition, because there are contracts which are not based on any promise; that is when they are implied in law.Bronte wrote:That seems too broad. This would include criminal liability and other liability deriving from statute, like an antitrust action. The credited definition is a promise or set of promises the breach of which has a legal remedy, like shepdawg said.ben4847 wrote:A non-tort liability.
That is why my definition is superior, since it encompasses any liability imposed which is not based on tort theories.
Child custody suit is also an action in contract, since you contractually bind yourself to the normal custody rules when having unprotected sex.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login