In reading the
Milliken case and
the casebook’s study questions afterward, concentrate on the following
are the arguments for and against using the law of the place of
determine the capacity of someone to contract? What are the arguments
against using the law of the place of domicile of the person whose
that under the law of Maine
two-year-olds can contract. Under the
law of Massachusetts
(and everywhere else), they cannot. Billy, who is two, finds himself in
Maine and enters into a contract with
P. P then sues Billy
for breach in Massachusetts
court. What result?
that an offer is sent from Maine to Massachusetts.
acceptance is written up in Massachusetts
and put into a mailbox there. Under the common law, the contract was
consummated at the point of mailing. The offeror could not withdraw the
after that point, even if the offeror had not yet received the
mail. So why was the contract in Milliken consummated in Maine? Why
wasn’t it consummated when Pratt put
his wife’s guarantee in the mail in Massachusetts?
the hypothetical in question 7 on pp. 24-25 of the casebook in both the
7th and 8th ed.. How would the
decided under the First Restatement if brought in Indiana or Michigan.?
First Restatement approach to the problem is discussed in question 3 on
22-24 of the casebook in both the 7th and 8th eds.)
problem in question 7 on p. 24-25 of the casebook in both the 7th and
8th eds. is that where
a contract was entered into is a legal question. So one must
first choose a law to determine this question, the answer to which will
what law applies to the contract. Is there an analogous problem in
Imagine D exposes P to a harmful chemical in Massachusetts.
P learns about the exposure in Maine
where he worries about it. Finally, the physical harm from the
themselves when P is back in Massachusetts.
Under the law of Massachusetts,
fear of exposure is a legally cognizable harm. Under the law of Maine, it is
not. P sues
D in tort. Which law applies, Massachusetts
it depend upon the state one sues in?
that P and D contracted in Maine.
P sues D for breach, but D argues that the contract is invalid because
fraud, P’s misrepresentations having been made in Massachusetts. Which law applies to
the issue of whether the fraud is sufficient to invalidate the contract?
D agrees to
contribute money to a business in Massachusetts. He takes
no part in the management of the business and receives a proportional
the profits. Under the law of Massachusetts,
D is not personally liable for the business’s debts. Under the law of Maine, D is
liable. An agent of the business goes to Maine and enters into a
P. The business breaches and P sues D personally. Is D liable?
X and D enter
into an employment contract in Maine. Under the law of Maine, X cannot
his interest in future wages. Under the law of Massachusetts, he may. In Massachusetts,
X assigns his interest in
future wages to P. Is the assignment valid?
X and D enter
into an employment contract in Maine. Under the law of both
Maine and Massachusetts, D may assign his
future wages. But in Maine the
be in writing, whereas in Massachusetts,
it may be done orally. In Massachusetts,
X assigns his interests in future wages to P orally. Is the assignment
under the First Restatement, the place of performance governs certain
contractual matters. Consider the following:
A orally agrees to
clean the windows on B’s building in Massachusetts.
law the contract must be in writing to be valid. Under Massachusetts
law it can be valid if oral.
Is it valid?
A agrees to sell
and B to buy goods to be packed in Massachusetts
in the presence of two adults. Under Maine
law someone is an adult if 18 or over. Under Massachusetts law the relevant age
is 17. 17
year olds are used. Has the provision been satisfied?
Y, a married
woman domiciled in Massachusetts,
entered into a contract with X in Maine.
X attempts to satisfy his obligations under the contract by delivering
money to Y’s husband in Massachusetts.
The husband is, by the law of Massachusetts,
entitled to the payment of debts due to the wife. This is not true
law of Maine.
Which law applies?
and D enter into a contract in Maine.
Under the contract, D is to deliver coal to P weekly in Massachusetts.
One week P is late in paying and
D refuses to deliver coal the next week. P sues D for damages resulting
failure to perform under the contract. Under the law of Maine, P
breached by failing to pay,
excusing D from further performance. Under the law of Massachusetts,
D is not excused. Which law
Milliken case, so that Maine bars
from contracting and not Massachusetts.
Would it make sense for Maine
law to apply in this case?