Business Law and Enforcing Contracts Essay

Excerpt from Essay :

Whichever party files the claim has the initial burden to establish that a valid contract existed (Halbert & Ingulli, 2009). In that regard, any credible evidence such as a tape recording of the original telephone call or of any subsequent calls referring to the existence of the agreement will suffice to establish the existence of a valid enforceable verbal contract for services to be provided by Eddie. Credible testimony in court from witnesses who actually heard the conversation or to whom either party admitted the existence of the agreement would also establish the existence of a valid and enforceable contract (Halbert & Ingulli, 2008).

If Eddie breaches, Grace would be seeking the remedy of the compensation for any benefit of the bargain lost, such as where she subsequently ends up paying more for the same services. If Grace breaches, Eddie would be seeking his lost profit from the sale of services, in which case he would have to prove that he was unable to rebook the time at the same amount of profit for his time.

Contributory and Comparative Negligence Concepts

By failing to use the crosswalk and by darting out into traffic, the plaintiff was negligent and therefore partially responsible for his own injuries (Freidman, 2005). The driver was also negligent; therefore recovery will depend on state laws with respect to contributory negligence and comparative negligence (Freidman, 2005). Generally, contributory negligence is a common law concept that provides an absolute defense in tort law that extinguishes the responsibility of tortfeasors for harm resulting to a plaintiff who is even partly responsible for his injuries or damages (Freidman, 2005). Because the doctrine can result in unfair outcomes, such as where the plaintiff's negligent responsibility is minimal compared to the defendant's, most American states have adopted the doctrine of comparative negligence instead (Freidman, 2005).

Whereas contributory negligence extinguishes the liability of the defendant absolutely, comparative negligence statutes consider the respective degrees of fault of the parties (Freidman, 2005). In some states, there is a threshold requirement of a specific amount of negligence required to recover; in other states, fault is apportioned precisely in accordance with the finding of respective levels of negligence (Freidman, 2005).

The pedestrian will argue that his injuries were attributable to the negligent driving of the driver; the driver will argue that the accident would never have occurred but for the negligent action of the pedestrian. In some states, the pedestrian will have to prove that the negligence of the driver exceeded his own negligence. In other states, the negligence of the driver will be mitigated by that of the plaintiff and the plaintiff's award will simply be reduced by the exact apportionment of his negligent responsibility (Freidman, 2005). The pedestrian would be seeking to recover out-of-pocket losses, medical payments, pain and suffering, and compensation for future disability. The driver might seek remedies in the form of his car repair bill and any injuries of his own.


Friedman, L.M. (2005). A History of American Law. New York: Touchstone.…

Sources Used in Document:


Friedman, L.M. (2005). A History of American Law. New York: Touchstone.

Halbert, T., and Ingulli, E. (2008). Law & Ethics in the Business Environment.

Cincinnati, OH: West Legal Studies.

Cite This Essay:

"Business Law And Enforcing Contracts" (2009, December 11) Retrieved June 3, 2020, from

"Business Law And Enforcing Contracts" 11 December 2009. Web.3 June. 2020. <>

"Business Law And Enforcing Contracts", 11 December 2009, Accessed.3 June. 2020,