Sam Stevens Case Study

Sam Stevens has two potentially legal matters that he is facing at the same time. The first case involves a verbal agreement between Sam and the manager of a national chain store. Sam invented a sound machine that imitates dogs barking in an attempt to deter burglars. Sam told the manager he would ship 1,000 units to the store. It has now been several months later and Sam has not shipped any devices and has received a letter from the store asking for the agreed upon units promptly. A few factors need to be considered in order to conclude a valid contract has been made between Sam and the national store chain. First, an agreement must contain an offer and acceptance. There must also be consideration, capacity and legality for a contract to …show more content…
Sam’s landlord, Quinn, sent him a letter stating he is being evicted because his dog barking machine has been bothering the other tenants in the complex. The notice also states that Sam is not allowed to conduct a business from his apartment and he has 30 days to vacate the premises. Sam immediately becomes angry because he recalls telling Quinn about an invention he is working on and Quinn wished him luck. Under a standard residential lease both the landlord and tenant have expected duties and rights. A landlord’s duties include putting the tenant in possession of the premises and a promise to let the tenant quietly enjoy the land, also known as covenant of quiet enjoyment. The rights a landlord is due is the right to reimbursement due to a tenant’s waste. An example of a tenant’s waste is any damages done to the property, such as holes in the walls. The tenant’s rights are a mirroring of the landlord’s duties meaning the tenant has the right to possession of property and a right to quietly enjoy the property. The tenant also has the duty to not commit waste. Should Quinn continue to allow Sam to disturb the other tenants, Quinn will be in breach of contract with his other tenants because he has done nothing to stop the loud, barking noises causing them to not be able to quietly enjoy the property. It is unknown at this time whether or not there is any additions or added exceptions to Sam’s lease agreement that state the property cannot be used for business purposes. If there is nothing within their contract that states this then Quinn has no ground to stand on and cannot evict Sam based on that accusation. Quinn can evict Sam on the grounds that under a standard residential lease agreement it states that the resident will not make noise that will bother other tenants otherwise they are in breach of the lease agreement. Sam can possibly dispute the eviction by stating that he was not given any