Chapter 4

三種合同：

Valid 有效合同 法律上可接受

Voidable Contract 可撤銷合同 一方可選擇不履行 (必須是有法律殘疾legal disability的一方進(jìn)行取消)在殘疾期間和殘疾消失后的合理時間內(nèi)可用

Void Contract (Invalid Contract) 無效合同 在法庭上無法執(zhí)行的

Element of contract 合同的特性：

1.?Contractual Capacity 簽署能力

minors未成年人(18)，mental incompetent精神上無能，intoxicated喝醉的人

2.Mutuality 相互性

the parties must?have a “meeting of the minds”

They must agree on the terms?in their contract;

Mutuality is established by an?offer and an acceptance建立在offer和acceptance上的

Offer: a proposal to do or give?something of value in exchange for?something else；

Invitation to negotiate: It is just a preliminary discussion and?cannot be accepted in a contractuallybinding manner；

3.Legality 合法性

4.Consideration 考慮

三個變量：tangible items，performance，forbearance禁止做合法的事

（禁止20歲以下的任何就不屬于對價，法律不允許）

5.Proper form 正規(guī)的形式

必須書面：Contracts for the purchase and sale of real estate (land and buildings)買不動產(chǎn)；Contracts that cannot be completed within one year from when they are made合同一年內(nèi)不能完成；Contracts to pay another’s debt if that person fails to pay償還債務(wù)；Contracts for the sale of goods (moveable/tangible) in excess of $500超過500塊的有形產(chǎn)品；

6.?Genuine Assent ?The parties must truly agree to the?terms of the contract（雙方必須真同意）

A unilateral mistake單邊錯誤: not impact the validity of a contract

A mutual mistake雙邊錯誤: a meeting of the minds and render a?contract unenforceable

7.Breach of contract 違約

Requirements for plaintiff to collect damages原告要求賠償?shù)臈l件

? Foreseeability: damages were foreseeable to the?breaching party.?可預(yù)見

? Reasonable certainty: benefits were certain and the?loss was a result of the breach of contract合理

? Duty to mitigate: plaintiff must prove that it?attempted to reduce and lessen its loss.?原告履行了減少損失的義務(wù)

Chapter 5

Four elements to the tort of negligence構(gòu)成過失的四個條件

1.Existence of a legal duty法律義務(wù)存在

2.Breach of that duty違反了義務(wù)

3.Injury to the plaintiff對原告造成了損失

4.Proximate cause (cause-and-effect?relationship)近因

Refers to the direct and immediate cause;?A chain of causation between defendant’s?negligence and plaintiff’s injury

偏向原告的過失原則

1.Res Ipsa Loquitur（“The thing speaks for itself”）

the plaintiff?has difficulty proving the necessary?elements (breach the duty)；Free plaintiff from the burden of proving the breach of duty of defendant

1.?Negligence Per Se Doctrine（本身過失原則）

Act that violates a law or ordinance to?protect the safety of the public；Any act violating the law --- negligence (need not prove the breach of duty)

原告需證明：Existence of the law and ordinance法律條例存在; Defendant’s violation of it被告造成的; Injury有傷害; Proximate cause近因

3.Strict Liability嚴(yán)格責(zé)任

a person will be liable even though he/she violated no duty

4.Strict Products Liability嚴(yán)格產(chǎn)品責(zé)任

Imposes liability on the seller of a defective product without regard to negligence；The liability applies even if the seller did not know of the defect

5.Respondeat Superior雇主責(zé)任

Employers are liable for negligent acts of employees

Negligent employee must have been acting “within the scope of his employment” (doing his assigned tasks)過失員工必須是在工作范圍

偏向被告的過失原則

1.Contributive Negligence 促成過失

If the plaintiff’s negligence contributed to the injury, cannot collect any damage from defendant.

2.Doctrine of Last Clear Chance最后明確原則

Plaintiffs can use the doctrine of last clearchance to support their cases需證明

Plaintiff is negligent；Defendant could have still avoided the accident by reasonable care in the final moments；As the defendant could have prevented the accident, plaintiff’s negligence is no longer the cause of the accident

3.Comparative Negligence比較過失

both a plaintiff and a defendant are?at a fault, they should share the responsibility

4.Assumption of Risk風(fēng)險承擔(dān)

A plaintiff who knowingly and voluntarily?engages in dangerous activity and if is?injured as a result of that risk, the plaintiff?cannot sue for damages suffered