Law Commons^™

Taxing Choices, Tessa R. Davis

Faculty Publications

Tax has a choice problem. At all stages of the making of tax, choice plays a role. Lawmakers consider how tax will impact the range and appeal of choices available to an individual. Scholars critique how tax may drive an individual toward or away from a given choice. Courts craft stories of how an individual had either free or deeply constrained choice, using their perception of the facts to guide their interpretation of tax law. And yet for all the seeming relevance of choice to tax, we have no clear definition of what we mean when we talk about choice …

Why Does Lord Denning's Lead Balloon Intrigue Us Still? The Prospects Of Finding A Unifying Principle For Duress, Undue Influence And Unconscionability, Marcus Moore

All Faculty Publications

To this day, Lord Denning’s opinion in Lloyds Bank v Bundy remains a staple of first-year Contracts courses in law faculties across the common law world. After surveying doctrines such as duress, undue influence, and unconscionable bargains, Denning posited that they were instances of an underlying principle permitting avoidance of a contract for “inequality of bargaining power”. Although rejected by the House of Lords, Denning’s proposition has intrigued Contract scholars for more than four decades. Subsequent attempts to “fix” Denning’s thesis have fallen short. Yet, authors of Contract textbooks persist in asking whether the doctrines might yet be unified in …

Sign Or Die: The Threat Of Imminent Physical Harm And The Doctrine Of Duress In Contract Law, Daniel P. O'Gorman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Duress As Rent-Seeking, Mark Seidenfeld, Murat C. Mungan

Faculty Scholarship

The doctrine of duress allows a party to avoid its contractual obligations when that party was induced to enter the contract by a wrongful threat while in a dire position that left it no choice but to enter the contract. Although threats of criminal or tortious conduct clearly are wrongful, under the doctrine of “economic duress” courts have held that other threats can be wrongful and hence the basis of a duress defense. Courts, however, have not developed a coherent understanding of what makes such non-criminal and non-tortious threats wrongful.

This Article proposes that a threat should be wrongful when …

Defects In Consent And Dividing The Benefit Of The Bargain: Recent Developments, Jeffrey L. Harrison

UF Law Faculty Publications

Contract law professors and students, attorneys, judges know that discussions about consent are rarely about consent. This results from three factors. First, it is the appearance of consent that is necessary to form a contract. Second, not every manifestation of consent is sufficient to create a contract that cannot be avoided. Third, interpretations of consent have the potential to allow courts to intervene when the benefit of the bargain is seen to be unfairly divided or one of the parties is actually worse off as a result of the contract. This Article assesses the extent to which recent decisions about …

Revisiting Austin V. Loral: A Study In Economic Duress, Contract Modification And Framing, Meredith R. Miller

Scholarly Works

Austin v. Loral, 29 N.Y.2d 124 (1971), is a favorite among Contracts casebooks because the New York Court of Appeals held that it was a "classic" example of economic duress. It involved Austin, a small gear part manufacturer, who had entered into a subcontract to provide gear parts to Loral, a publicly-traded defense industry supplier. Loral had a contract with the U.S. government to supply radar sets, to be used in the U.S. efforts in Vietnam. Midway through performance of the subcontract, Austin apparently refused to continue to deliver the gear parts unless Loral acceded to certain demands, which included …

Threatening An Irrational Breach Of Contract, Oren Bar-Gill, Omri Ben-Shahar

Articles

When circumstances surrounding the contract change, a party might consider breach a more attractive option than performance. Threatening breach, this party may induce the other party to modify the original agreement. The contract law doctrine of modification determines whether and when these modifications are enforceable. To promote social welfare as well as the interests of the threatened party, the law should enforce modifications if and only if the modification demand is backed by a credible threat to breach. This paper argues that credibility is not a function of pecuniary interests alone. A decision to breach can be motivated also by …

The Law Of Duress And The Economics Of Credible Threats, Oren Bar-Gill, Omri Ben-Shahar

Articles

This paper argues that enforcement of an agreement, reached under a threat to refrain from dealing, should be conditioned solely on the threat's credibility. When a credible threat exists, enforcement promotes social welfare and the threatened party's interests. If agreements backed by credible threats were not enforceable, the threatening party would not extort them and would instead refrain from deaing-to the threatened party's detriment. The doctrine of duress, which invalidates such agreements, hurts the coerced party. By denying enforcement when a credible threat exists, the duress doctrine precludes the threatened party from making the commitment necessary to reach agreement. Paradoxically, …

A Better Approach To Arbitrability, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Historically, Anglo-American courts refused to enforce arbitration agreements, jealously guarding their dispute resolution monopoly. During the early twentieth century, merchants and attorneys began seeking legislation requiring courts to defer to arbitration. The United States Abitration Act took effect January 1, 1926 and has remained essentially unchanged. It was written with the implicit assumption that it would be invoked by commercial actors having relatively equal bargaining power and emotive appeal to a jury. The Act says nothing to direct the court's inquiry concerning the quality of either party's assent to the arbitration clause other than requiring a written arbitration agreement and …

Stepping Out Of The Morass Of Duress Cases: A Suggested Policy Guide, Juliet P. Kostritsky

Faculty Publications

Traditional coercion theories and elements are simply inadequate as an exclusive focus of analysis in duress cases. This Article does not propose a new theory of duress. Instead, it suggests a refinement of doctrine in which the courts candidly articulate certain key policy goals and develop elements based on them. These policy goals include efficiency, disclosure of unexpected risks, judicial capability, reliance, and economic incentives. If decisionmakers adopted the policy analyses suggested here, the predictability of judicial decisionmaking would be enhanced and a supplemental analysis would be available when the doctrinal elements become difficult to apply. Moreover, this approach would …