Contracts & Two-Prong Test For Unconscionability

-

 


Chaplain v. Chaplain, Record No. 1301-10-1 (Va. Ct. App. Jan. 18, 2011)

Wife, Rabha Namrouri Chaplain to husband Billy W. Chaplain, appealed from a ruling that her premarital agreement with her husband was enforceable under the Premarital Agreement Act, Code. In this appeal following the remand in the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, it was found that the premarital agreement was not unconscionable. The court cited  Virginia's Premarital Agreement Act, which explains that a premarital agreement is not enforceable if the person against whom enforcement is sought proves that: (1) That person did not execute the agreement voluntarily, or (2) The agreement was unconscionable when it was executed and, before execution of the agreement, that person (i) was not provided a fair and reasonable disclosure of the property or financial obligations of the other party; and (ii) did not voluntarily and expressly waive, in writing, any right to disclosure of the property or financial obligations of the other party beyond the disclosure provided.


Newman v. Roland Machinery Company, Case No. 2:08-cv-185 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 8, 2009)

Plaintiffs William Newman and Newman Forest Products LLC brought suit in Delta County Circuit Court in the State of Michigan for breach of contract, fraud in the inducement, innocent and willful misrepresentation, and unconscionable contract under Michigan law.  This court previously granted the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment.  The court had reviewed the arguments of the parties, evidence, and law and had determined that the defendant's motion will be denied in part and granted in part.  The defendant's motion for summary judgment regarding the plaintiffs' unconscionability claim will be granted.  Under Michigan law a court may invalidate a contract that is determined to be unconscionable. Courts may even invalidate commercial contracts due to unconscionability.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Scenario: Minnesota Law (w/ Case Briefs, Statute Explanation, and Table of Authorities)

-
Image
Scenario The managing partner at your Minnesota law firm wants you to research and provide information concerning a minor’s lack of capacity to enter into a binding contract. She wants you to locate the following three Minnesota cases, as well as a fourth Minnesota case on the matter. 1. Ramsey Cnty. v. Guardian Ad Litem, 853 N.W.2d 813 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). 2. Winter v. Skoglund, 404 N.W.2d 786 (Minn. 1987). 3. O'Brien Ent. Agcy. v. Wolfgramm, 407 N.W.2d 463 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). She also wants you to locate the following two statutes and explain what a defendant is required to demonstrate concerning a minor’s lack of capacity. 1. MINN. STAT. ANN. § 645.45 (West 2016). 2. MINN. STAT. ANN. § 524.2-501 (West 2016). After you have located those four cases and two statutes, please provide one case brief for each case, for a total of four case briefs. Also, please provide an explanation for each statute. Minnesota Case Briefs and Statute Breakdown Citation: Ramsey Cnty. v. Guardi...
Read more

Posner's Critique of the Bluebook (w/ In-Text Bluebook Citations)

-
Image
  In his thorough analysis of the Bluebook, Posner presents us with an overall solid and convincing critique of the pedantic rules and regulations that encompass legal writing. He gives us two main reasons why modern legal writing needs a reformation, and why the Bluebook needs a new and improved successor. These two main reasons, or critiques, include the tedious rules enforced upon legal citation and the overall style enforced upon legal writing in general. Posner's strongest argument against the Bluebook revolves around the nature of its legal citation rules, which is broken down into smaller parts. First, Posner critiques the Bluebook for enforcing a rule that forces the writer to abbreviate the name of an author of an article or book down to their last name. Richard A. Posner,  Goodbye to the Bluebook , 53 U.Chi.L.Rev. 1343, 1345 (1986). He believes that the full name of the author should be written to avoid confusion, since many authors shar...
Read more

Case Brief: Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc. and the Issue of Tort Liability

-
Image
  Citation: Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc ., 601 F.2d 516 (10th Cir. 1979) Facts: In the midst of a professional football game, plaintiff Dale Hackbart and defendant, Charles Clark, were on opposing teams. During one of the plays, Hackbart fell to one knee in front of Clark. In retaliation, Clark intentionally struck a blow to the back of Hackbart’s head with enough force to knock both of the players to the ground. However, a foul was not called during the game, nor was the incident reported by either of the players. Some time after the game, Hackbart decided to seek medical treatment, and it was discovered that he had sustained a serious neck fracture injury. Procedural History: The plaintiff sues defendant, Cincinnati Bengals, for damages caused by the actions of Charles Clark. Originally, the trial court determined in favor of the defendant. However, the judgment was reversed and remanded by the appellate court for a new trial. Issue: Is the plaintiff entitle...
Read more