Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Contracts Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Contracts

Trail Mountain Coal Co. V. Utah Division Of State Lands & Forestry: Can States Retroactively Alter Their Own Contractual Obligations?, Michael S. Lee Nov 1997

Trail Mountain Coal Co. V. Utah Division Of State Lands & Forestry: Can States Retroactively Alter Their Own Contractual Obligations?, Michael S. Lee

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.


Court Of Appeals Ballentine V. Koch (Decided October 22, 1996) Jan 1997

Court Of Appeals Ballentine V. Koch (Decided October 22, 1996)

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


The New Requirement Of Enforcement Reliance In Commercial Promissory Estoppel: Section 90 As Catch-22, Sidney Delong Jan 1997

The New Requirement Of Enforcement Reliance In Commercial Promissory Estoppel: Section 90 As Catch-22, Sidney Delong

Faculty Articles

Any comprehensive examination of recent appellate court decisions will disclose that the legal doctrine of promissory estoppel has not become a significant source of commercial contractual obligation. Although commercial promissory estoppel claims are often made, plaintiff victories are very rare. These results are difficult to reconcile with frequent scholarly contentions to the effect that contemporary courts have become more receptive to claims of promissory estoppel and have liberalized its doctrinal requirements. More important, the promisor behavior that is incidentally disclosed in reported opinions also undermines academic arguments that rules providing for promissory estoppel have commercial utility. The decisions suggest that …


International Jurisdiction In Products Liability Cases (Analysis Of Asahi And Post-Asahi Cases), Tsutomu Kuribayashi Jan 1997

International Jurisdiction In Products Liability Cases (Analysis Of Asahi And Post-Asahi Cases), Tsutomu Kuribayashi

LLM Theses and Essays

With the increase of foreign trade, there has also been an increase in the number of foreign manufacturers and distributors involved in product liability litigation in the United States. In many cases, the products from these foreign manufacturers and distributors reach the forum states through the stream of commerce, and are distributed to the customers by regional distributors, wholesalers, and retailers. Therefore, in many product liability cases where defective products from these foreign manufacturers and distributors cause injuries to people in the United States, those foreign companies do not have a direct relationship with the forum states. In these cases, …


Form Contracts Under Revised Article 2 (Symposium: Consumer Protection And The Uniform Commercial Code), James J. White Jan 1997

Form Contracts Under Revised Article 2 (Symposium: Consumer Protection And The Uniform Commercial Code), James J. White

Articles

The current draft of section 2-206 in Revised Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC") entitled "Consumer Contract: Standard Form"1 presents a unique and threatening challenge to the drafters of consumer form contracts. In earlier drafts, one part of the section applied to both to commercial contracts and consumer contracts. It required that "one manifest assent" to any form contract, commercial or consumer, in order for it to be binding.2 Bowing to commercial opposition in the most recent version, the drafters have omitted all reference to commercial contracts. As the section stands, it applies only to consumer contracts.


On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley Jan 1997

On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley

Scholarly Works

As a general rule, extrinsic evidence, whether written or oral, is not admissible to prove either the intent of the parties to a contract or the meaning of contractual terms when the parties have executed an unambiguous, fully-integrated (i.e., final and all-inclusive) written agreement. The trial court may consider various types of extrinsic evidence, however, in determining whether a particular agreement is fully integrated or ambiguous, and even in choosing among rival interpretations of an agreement where ambiguity is not present. If the trial court determines that an agreement is not fully integrated, then the trier of fact may consider …