OFFICIAL 1L Exam Prep & Motivation Thread (CSWS) Forum

[Jsa725]

.

[gaud]

11 days until my first final. fml

4, eff ehm ehl.

geez bro

[salix]

11 days until my first final. fml

I'll be ready for my first final in 11 days. Unfortunately I only have 4 days...

I'm right there with you, JSA725. CSWS.

[Jsa725]

.

[gaud]

I guess that means you both will get your A's before me

[SportsFan]

11 days until my first final. fml

10th for you too? Ugh. I'm going to be doing some mixed studying for all my finals until after this weekend, then I'm gonna start focusing only on my first final. IMO the worst part of all this will be the loooong wait for grades.

My attack outlines for my first 2 finals are just about done now, too. So at this point its just gonna be PT's and studying/memorizing/refining my outlines until finals.

[crumpetsandtea]

Someone please please force me to stop procrastinating.

[SportsFan]

Someone please please force me to stop procrastinating.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=192753

[Jsa725]

.

[ArmyOfficer]

Just found this thread. Good stuff. Wish I would have done so earlier.

First exam in 8 days.

CSWS

[Pleasye]

11 days until my first final. fml

54, eff ehm ehl.

FTFM

[Jsa725]

.

[Raiden]

A-team, I have a quick contracts question.

What the proper formula for calculating remedies in a breech of K?

From my understanding its:

[K price] - [fair market value or cover] - [incidental damages] - [consequential damages]

or is it actually: [K price] - [fair market value or cover] & then you subtract incidental damages] + [consequential damages] separately? I didn't understand the logic of numero 30 in K's Crunchtime.

Expectation damages is essentially giving the non-breaching party the benefit of the bargain. That is the underlying rationale. It's easier to look to the totality of circumstances and the underlying rationale, it helps with the analysis unless it's MC or something.

Mechanically, it's K-price - market price + incidentals (if any) + consequentials* - losses saved because of breach.

*Sellers don't get consequentials under the UCC (if the contract is for goods, look out for this), only buyers do.

The analysis should look at the non-breaching party's reasonable attempts at mitigating losses (cover etc) and whether they were obligated to mitigate damages to begin with.

Consequentials should be analyzed from the point of forseeability. They must naturally flow from the breach, I forget the exact wording (I haven't studied for K's).

Special damages should consider whether they were communicated (there's a specific phrase for this) at the time of contracting (compare the case about the shaft...Hadley?...with the one about some crane or something).There's a minority rule in Arkansas that requires tacit agreement at the time of contracting for special damages to apply.

This all depends on what your professor taught and the specific fact pattern, as well as the point at which there was a breach, which is why knowing the "benefit of the bargain - i.e. putting parties into a position had the contract been performed" helps.

Just to clarify this, raiden, your biggest mistake seems to be subtracting consequential when you should be adding them.

I think that answers it. You add in consequential and incidentals after you find the difference between K price and the fair market value.

E.g. K price = 150, FMV = 130, Incidentals = 30.

K - FMV = 150 - 120 = 30 benefit (so no loss, breaching party doesn't have to pay these damages)

However, incidental damages are 30, therefore the breeching party only needs to pay 30.

This seem correct?

[Raiden]

11 days until my first final. fml

54, eff ehm ehl.

FTFM

I don't know what that acronym means, but 5 days here as well.

Pedal to the medal.

[gaud]

fml = fuck my life

[swimmer11]

My exams are two weeks away. I thought they were close :/

[Nova]

fml = fuck my life

Or

FTFM= fixed that for me

[Raiden]

IDKWYATA = I don't know what you are talking about. Coolest acronym in school.

[Blessedassurance]

I think that answers it. You add in consequential and incidentals after you find the difference between K price and the fair market value.

E.g. K price = 150, FMV = 130, Incidentals = 30.

K - FMV = 150 - 120 = 30 benefit (so no loss, breaching party doesn't have to pay these damages)

However, incidental damages are 30, therefore the breeching party only needs to pay 30.

This seem correct?

No. Break down the steps. First you subtract the fair market value from the k price and arrive at a figure. Then you add incidentals(if any). Then you add consequentials, if any. Then you subtract the loss saved by the non-breaching party because of the breach, if any.

In your above example:

Step 1: Kprice(150) - FMV(130) = 20
Step 2: answer in step one (20) + incidentals (30) = 50

If there's nothing else, the final answer is 50.

The basic structure is:
1. (kprice-fmv)
2. + incidentals (if any)
3. + consequentials (if any)
4. - losses saved (if any)

Let's add consequentials to your hypo. Say consequentials = 60

Damages would be:

Step 1: kprice(150) - fmv(120) = 20
Step 2: answer in step one (20) + incidentals (30) = 50
Step 3: answer in step two (50) + consequentials (60) = 110

So damages = 110

The losses saved part is not based on all the calculation above, it's a separate issue. They are losses that the non-breaching party would have expended in performance of the contract that were not expended because of the breach. You'll see those in more complex fact patterns.

[Nova]

What are you guys doing to prevent burn out??

I want to go hard (14-15 hour work days) every day... but today I just feel like shit.

[Jsa725]

.

[Raiden]

I think that answers it. You add in consequential and incidentals after you find the difference between K price and the fair market value.

E.g. K price = 150, FMV = 130, Incidentals = 30.

K - FMV = 150 - 120 = 30 benefit (so no loss, breaching party doesn't have to pay these damages)

However, incidental damages are 30, therefore the breeching party only needs to pay 30.

This seem correct?

No. Break down the steps. First you subtract the fair market value from the k price and arrive at a figure. Then you add incidentals(if any). Then you add consequentials, if any. Then you subtract the loss saved by the non-breaching party because of the breach, if any.

In your above example:

Step 1: Kprice(150) - FMV(130) = 20
Step 2: answer in step one (20) + incidentals (30) = 50

If there's nothing else, the final answer is 50.

The basic structure is:
1. (kprice-fmv)
2. + incidentals (if any)
3. + consequentials (if any)
4. - losses saved (if any)

Let's add consequentials to your hypo. Say consequentials = 60

Damages would be:

Step 1: kprice(150) - fmv(120) = 20
Step 2: answer in step one (20) + incidentals (30) = 50
Step 3: answer in step two (50) + consequentials (60) = 110

So damages = 110

The losses saved part is not based on all the calculation above, it's a separate issue. They are losses that the non-breaching party would have expended in performance of the contract that were not expended because of the breach. You'll see those in more complex fact patterns.

Thanks for the very nice breakdown, math rules!

Though, I am unsure about the first step: Step 1: Kprice(150) - FMV(130) = 20

I should have specified, but say this hypo is from the perspective of the Buyer. So the K price was 150, FMV fell to 130. The buyer benefited from the sellers breach since they bought the product for a cheaper value. Since the purpose is to put the non breeching party in the situation had the performance occured, they can just pocket the extra 20 that that is not factored into the calculation, correct?

[Blessedassurance]

I should have specified, but say this hypo is from the perspective of the Buyer. So the K price was 150, FMV fell to 130. The buyer benefited from the sellers breach since they bought the product for a cheaper value. Since the purpose is to put the non breeching party in the situation had the performance occured, they can just pocket the extra 20 that that is not factored into the calculation, correct?

What was the contract and who breached?

There are incidentals you have to add in somewhere.

A hypo wouldn't be that simple since a non-breaching party profiting from the breach will simply walk away, as a rational agent.

What's the full hypo?

[SportsFan]

My finals are the 10th (contracts), 14th (torts), and 20th (Civ pro). Think I'll study only contracts starting like next Wednesday, then only torts the 11th-13th, and only civ pro the 15th-19th. Assuming that before I start exlcusively studying contracts I can get a lot/most of my outlines memorized, I hope I'll be in good shape...

[shredderrrrrr]

Finals start on the 10th for me.

I am extremely calm and relaxed.

Because of this, I am more stressed out and worried than I have ever been.