Law 421 Week 4 Case Scenario

627 Words3 Pages
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Garrett Buckley LAW/421 January 14, 2014 Thomas Friedman Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? Based on the scenario, it seems as if both parties were unable to come up with a deal. In the scenario, both parties reached an agreement three days before the 90 day timeframe that was put in place to make the deal. The deal states that until it was on paper, there would be no distribution agreement. The email that was sent was never an official agreement because both partied did not physically sign the agreement, which means that it was not legally binding. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? There are several facts that weigh in favor of Chou in terms of the parties objective intent to contract. Chou was paid $25,000 for the legal rights to his game. Chou would get the idea that BTT was interested in making a deal on a distribution agreement. If this were a written agreement this would support Chou, but since there was not a written agreement, the company was not held responsible to distribute the game. Because of this, Chou had every right to walk away over honoring the agreement. 3. Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2? Email has a huge impact on my analysis in questions 1 and 2. Emails are not a signed agreement. Even though both parties had all intent of an agreement, nothing was ever inked in to make the deal official. The agreement was not legally binding in any way. 4. What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract? The biggest role that the statute of frauds plays in this contract is that based on the UCC, the statute of scam comes into play. The reason for this is because this is

More about Law 421 Week 4 Case Scenario

Open Document