Discussion Questions Board C
A. Charles Wohltmann of Executive Recruitment, an employee recruitment company, twice talked with a Boston Scientific Corp. sales representative who had no authority to accept offers for hiring employees. Later, Thomas Schmidt contact a friend who worked for Boston Scientific and found out that the company had a job opening in Birmingham where he wanted to work. Schmidt applied and eventually was hired by Boston. Executive Recruitment then claimed it had an oral contract for recruiting with Boston and should be paid for Schmidt’s hiring. Should it?
A
Charles Wohltmann of Executive Recruitment had an oral conversation with a Boston Scientific sales representative does not constitute a contractual agreement for …show more content…
Gary Neugent leased a gas station and purchased gas from Amoco Oil Co. Walter and Vernice Beroth met with Neugent to discuss buying gasoline from them instead of directly from Amoco. One of the Beroth’s mentioned a price of “6 cents over Beroth’s cost.” Neugent thought “cost” meant the “rack price” or the price at which the Beroth’s bought the fuel, and the Beroth’s meant rack price plus tax and freight. Three months later, the Beroth’s took over Amoco’s lease, and Neugent started getting gas from them. He later discovered that they had been charging him rack price plus freight plus 6 cents a gallon and sued for breach of an oral contract. Did he have a contract with the Beroth’s at rack …show more content…
Neugent mistake. His definition of ‘cost’ was not the same as the Beroth's definition, bringing both parties into error due to misunderstanding. Mr. Neugent knew upon the first billing from the Beroth’s that his understanding of cost differed and should had immediately brought it to their attention and requesting a change to be made to the contract. Regrettably, it appears that both parties are forgetting about Amoco. Amoco's transactions are governed by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). Here are a few supporting articles:
1) A contract for sale of goods may be made in any manner sufficient to show agreement, including conduct by both parties which recognizes the existence of a contract.
2) An agreement sufficient to constitute a contract for sale may be found even though the moment of its making is undetermined.
3) Even though one or more terms are left open a contract for sale does not fail for indefiniteness if the parties have intended to make a contract and there is a reasonably certain basis for giving an appropriate
A. Charles Wohltmann of Executive Recruitment, an employee recruitment company, twice talked with a Boston Scientific Corp. sales representative who had no authority to accept offers for hiring employees. Later, Thomas Schmidt contact a friend who worked for Boston Scientific and found out that the company had a job opening in Birmingham where he wanted to work. Schmidt applied and eventually was hired by Boston. Executive Recruitment then claimed it had an oral contract for recruiting with Boston and should be paid for Schmidt’s hiring. Should it?
A
Charles Wohltmann of Executive Recruitment had an oral conversation with a Boston Scientific sales representative does not constitute a contractual agreement for …show more content…
Gary Neugent leased a gas station and purchased gas from Amoco Oil Co. Walter and Vernice Beroth met with Neugent to discuss buying gasoline from them instead of directly from Amoco. One of the Beroth’s mentioned a price of “6 cents over Beroth’s cost.” Neugent thought “cost” meant the “rack price” or the price at which the Beroth’s bought the fuel, and the Beroth’s meant rack price plus tax and freight. Three months later, the Beroth’s took over Amoco’s lease, and Neugent started getting gas from them. He later discovered that they had been charging him rack price plus freight plus 6 cents a gallon and sued for breach of an oral contract. Did he have a contract with the Beroth’s at rack …show more content…
Neugent mistake. His definition of ‘cost’ was not the same as the Beroth's definition, bringing both parties into error due to misunderstanding. Mr. Neugent knew upon the first billing from the Beroth’s that his understanding of cost differed and should had immediately brought it to their attention and requesting a change to be made to the contract. Regrettably, it appears that both parties are forgetting about Amoco. Amoco's transactions are governed by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). Here are a few supporting articles:
1) A contract for sale of goods may be made in any manner sufficient to show agreement, including conduct by both parties which recognizes the existence of a contract.
2) An agreement sufficient to constitute a contract for sale may be found even though the moment of its making is undetermined.
3) Even though one or more terms are left open a contract for sale does not fail for indefiniteness if the parties have intended to make a contract and there is a reasonably certain basis for giving an appropriate