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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Buyer's Remedies And Warranty Disclaimers: The Case For Mistake And The Indeterminacy Of U.C.C. Section 1-103, David Frisch Jan 1990

Buyer's Remedies And Warranty Disclaimers: The Case For Mistake And The Indeterminacy Of U.C.C. Section 1-103, David Frisch

Law Faculty Publications

The primary purpose of this article is not to end the longstanding malaise surrounding section 1-103, but to illuminate its existence and encourage a serious reconsideration of the extent to which common law and equitable principles serve as sources of law in resolving cases under the Code. A greater appreciation of the importance of this issue to commercial law development will result in an approach which makes the law more predictable and which better facilitates the essential need to keep the Code responsive to commercial practice. Part II of this article introduces the context within which section 1-103 will be …


The Surrogate Mother Contract: In The Best Interests Of Society?, Audrey Wolfson Latourette Jan 1990

The Surrogate Mother Contract: In The Best Interests Of Society?, Audrey Wolfson Latourette

University of Richmond Law Review

On March 31, 1987, Judge Harvey R. Sorkow upheld, for the first time, the validity of a surrogate mother-contract in his decision, In the Matter of Baby M. In broad and sweeping language, the judge deemed the contract between the natural mother, Mary Beth Whitehead, (termed the surrogate, pursuant to the contract language) and the natural father, William Stern, specifically enforceable. Judge Sorkow thus terminated Whitehead's parental rights to the child she bore and permanently denied her claims for future custody or future visitation. Creating new law, the judge held that baby selling and adoption laws do not pertain to …


Whose Beneficiaries Are They Anyway? Copenhaver V. Rogers And The Attorney's Contract To Prepare A Will In Virginia, Brian Adams Jan 1990

Whose Beneficiaries Are They Anyway? Copenhaver V. Rogers And The Attorney's Contract To Prepare A Will In Virginia, Brian Adams

University of Richmond Law Review

In a case of first impression in the Commonwealth, the Supreme Court of Virginia recently considered whether an attorney may be liable for drafting a will which results in the failure of a testamentary gift to intended beneficiaries. Historically, will beneficiaries had been denied a means of recovery against attorneys due to a lack of privity between the parties. Although Virginia remains a "strict privity' jurisdiction, it recognizes third-party contract beneficiary claims' and has legislatively abrogated the privity requirement in other areas of the law. The plaintiffs in Copenhaver v. Rogers sought to establish a third-party beneficiary claim as the …