Part 3- Contracts, Chapter 12: Consideration, Doc 4

To summarize the problems and explore the questions they raise: 1. Calabro v. Father for College Expenses    Issue: Calabro's father had promised to pay her college expenses at a private school if she received at least $10,000 in financial aid, which she did. However, he later stopped paying, and she sued under promissory estoppel. Analysis: For promissory estoppel to apply, Calabro must show that she reasonably relied on her father’s promise to her detriment (taking on student loans) and that injustice can only be avoided by enforcing the promise. Question: Was the father's promise enforceable under promissory estoppel principles? 2. Ross v. May Company for Employment Terms    Issue: Ross argued that the 1968 employee handbook’s termination process created a contractual right. Later handbook modifications disclaiming these rights could potentially invalidate Ross's claim. Analysis: Courts often require clear communication and employee consent for contractual modifications. Consider if May’s updated handbook effectively altered Ross’s employment terms. Question: Was Ross’s employment contract effectively modified by the later handbook updates? 3. Word of God Church Contract with Builders    Issue: Builders Stanley and Hemmelgarn encountered problems due to the building’s materials being mislabeled, leading to project delays and a request for more funds. Later, Stanley requested a release from the project. Analysis: The church argues that Stanley’s release is invalid for lack of consideration. For a valid release, Stanley must have provided some additional value. Question: Did Stanley offer valid consideration for his release? 4. Buchholz v. Schneider’s Milling on Contract Modification    Issue: Buchholz claimed that Schneider’s modified their contract, agreeing to a lower price per pig but requiring consistent deliveries. Analysis: Under the UCC, contract modifications do not require new consideration if made in good faith, which is relevant here since the modified price likely reflects changing market conditions. Question: Was the modification to $30 enforceable under the UCC? 5. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Papers at Boston University    Issue: The King Estate challenged BU’s claim of ownership over Dr. King’s papers, which he had stated would become BU’s property upon his death. Analysis: Promissory estoppel or charitable pledge principles may enforce Dr. King’s promise if BU reasonably relied on his intent and acted accordingly. Question: Was Dr. King’s pledge enforceable as a charitable gift? 6. Heye v. AGC on Arbitration Agreement    Issue: Heye signed an acknowledgment of arbitration policies but later sued AGC. AGC claimed arbitration was mandatory based on her signed acknowledgment. Analysis: To be enforceable, an arbitration agreement must be supported by valid consideration. This case examines whether Heye’s continued employment provided such consideration. Question: Was Heye’s acknowledgment of arbitration validly supported by consideration? 7. Davis v. Corinne on a Promissory Note for Property Sale    Issue: Corinne signed a promise to give Ruth and Bryan $40,000 upon selling her house. They later sued for breach when she did not pay. Analysis: Consideration for Corinne’s promise is key; without it, her promise may be deemed gratuitous and unenforceable. Question: Did Corinne provide adequate consideration to make her promise enforceable? 8. First Baptist Church’s Promise to Pastor Brads    Issue: Brads was promised a lifetime salary after retiring due to illness. However, after recovering and returning to work, this promise was not fulfilled. Analysis: Examining promissory estoppel, a court would assess whether Brads’ reliance on the church’s promise was reasonable and substantial enough to enforce it. Question: Did promissory estoppel create an enforceable right to the promised lifetime salary? Each scenario requires analysis of consideration, promissory estoppel, and contractual modifications to determine enforceability.