damages

the milky way

On October 5, 2011, David Cassidy sued Sony (among others) for his share of 40 years of Profits from the Partridge Family. The suit alleges that Sony and the other defendants “have been perpetrating a scam,” having only been paid approximately $5,000 for royalties on Partridge Family merchandise. What can this situation teach us about Statutes of Limitations and Unconscionability?

Share

Contract Killer Fails to Kill—Contract Modified

February 14, 2011
simeon henderson

If you have been reading this blog at least semi-regularly you will notice a couple issues given this post’s title: (1) A contract to kill someone, and (2) Modification of a contract. There technically isn’t anything wrong with modifying a contract, but generally every party to the contract needs to agree to the modification in [...]

Share
Read the full article →

Fine Print Friday: College Early Decision Agreements

December 17, 2010

It’s that time of year again–the time when high school seniors who have decided where they want to attend college begin receiving the admissions decision for early decision applications. It is always noted by the colleges and commentators alike that these are binding decisions (i.e., that you cannot accept the early decision agreement and then apply to or accept an offer of admissions to another school). The question is: What is the actual agreement students are making, and what are the consequences for breaking that agreement?

Share
Read the full article →

Minneapolis Teachers Awarded $17M on Breach of Contract

October 27, 2010

In a pair of arbitration rulings on October 26, 2010, the Minneapolis School District was determined to be in breach of its contract with its teachers, owing approximately $17 million in back wages. Even without seeing the documents, it is easy to see how this could occur. Lesson: perform your contractual obligations.

Share
Read the full article →

How to Escape a Contract

July 28, 2010

Jakarta’s House of Representatives ran into a contract problem recently: they decided they no longer wanted to be part of a contract they had signed with a developer to allow the use of land adjacent to the legislative complex to be used for a shopping mall for the next 25 years. That is a big [...]

Share
Read the full article →