Class 37, Friday, April 21.ppt

4/21/2006 Class 37 Class 37, Friday, April 21 Last set of assignments Wed 807-31; Problem Set 7 Thur 831-36; 847-65 Fri 890-907—in Donovan Hall note—we meet on Wednesday, not Tuesday next week; and Friday’s class will meet in Donovan Hall, not Robinson Today’s Agenda Assessing the level of breach Sackett v. Spindler Anticipatory Repudiation Truman L. Flatt Sons Co. v. Schupf Hornell Brewing Co. v. Spry Express Conditions Oppenheimer Co. v. Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon J.N.A. Realty Corp. v. Cross Bay Chelsea Morin Building v. Baystone Conditions Handout Today is yet another good day to cover a lot of material. Sackett v. SpindlerCalifornia District Court of Appeal248 Cal. App. 220, 56 Cal. Rptr. 435 (1967) Sackett’s duties pay $6000 by July 10 pay $20,000 by July 14 pay $59,000 by Aug. 15 Spindler’s duties deliver all shares of newspaper when does Spindler’s performance obligation become due? Did Sackett fulfill his performance obligations? If his failure to make the final payment is breach, what effect does this have on Spindler’s performance obligation? What argument does Sackett make based on Spindler’s Oct. 5 letter? What is a repudiation? When is a repudiation lawful? Or its corollary—when is a repudiation unlawful? Characterizing breach total or partial partial and material partial and immaterial total Why is it important to characterize the severity of one party’s breach of a contract? What are the options of the non-breaching party in the following scenarios? non-breaching breach party’s options partial and immaterial partial and material total How did this court characterize Sackett’s breach? Was the repudiation in the Oct. 5 letter lawful? If it wasn’t lawful, would that have affected the outcome in this case? § 241. Circumstances Significant In Determining Whether A Failure Is Material In determining whether a failure to render or to offer performance is material, the following circumstances