Business Law 421

816 Words4 Pages
Emanuel Robles Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker LAW/421 R. Rodriguez March 12,2012 Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point, if ever did the parties have a contract? The parties had a contract at the point of business email having been exchanged. According to the Statute of Frauds, the contract must be in writing. Business email has become a widely accepted mode of business communication. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of parties’ objective intent to contract? There are a few facts that weigh in favor of Chou. First, three days prior to the end of the 90 day exclusive negotiation rights agreement, they reached an oral agreement and then shortly thereafter, a business email from a BTT management representative was sent to Chou with the specifics of the agreement. The email stated “that all of the terms had been agreed upon.” BTT also subsequently requested Chou send them a draft distribution contract regurgitating the specifics of agreement spelled out in the email from the BBT manager. Finally, distribution of Strat would have exceeded the 500.00 limit of the Statute of Frauds. The fact that may weigh against Chou is that the contract never had a wet signature. 3. Does the fact that the parties were communicating by email have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 above? Yes, communication via email weighed heavily as business email is considered a normal mode of business communication is a written form of business communication. When the terms and specifics of the agreement were laid out via email, it became a written agreement, and therefore enforceable. 4. What role does the Statute of Frauds play in this contract? The Statute of Frauds states that an enforceable contract must be in writing; since email is a form of written business communication, the email encompasses the full terms and

More about Business Law 421

Open Document