Resolving Issues Relating to Contracts

Legal Advice for Cardigan's Situation Attorney Strami Strami and Hammond, Attorneys at Law Cardigan's Contract Situation A contract can be described as an agreement between two or more parties that generate obligations that are enforceable by law. Since contracts are promises enforceable by law, there are legal provisions that offer remedies or recourse if contractual obligations are breached. In order for contracts to be legally binding, they must entail exchange of a promise for sufficient consideration.

The basic principles of formation of a contract include the existence of an offer, acceptance, and consideration. The determination of contractual obligations requires examining whether these principles exist in the specific situation. Existence of a Contract The major issue surrounding Camille and Sonya's situation is whether or not a contract was formed based on the basic contract principles of offer, acceptance, and consideration. Based on these basic contract principles, a contract has been formed between Camille and Sonya.

It is quite evident that there was an offer made by Camille for Sonya to sew 500 unique sweaters and hat pair with Candie Cardigan's signature. This offer presented to Sonya involved exchange of a promise for enough consideration, which implied that it was legally binding ("Contract," n.d.). Secondly, there was acceptance of the offer since Sonya agreed to make every sweater and hat pair for $100.

Third, there was consideration because Sonya agreed to work on the contract right away despite lack of down payment while Camille was planning to sell each pair of sweater and hat at $300. This implies that Camille and Sonya received valuable consideration for fulfilling their respective sides of the agreement. The crucial part of the initial offer that may be missing in this situation is modalities of payment, which is shown in Camille's failure to give the conventional down payment of 25%.

Impact of Prior Dealings on Communication between Parties Contracts are sometimes formed through a course of dealing between two or more parties and sometimes entail unclear terms and conditions. While common terms may be included in the course of the dealings and formation of the contract, there are evidential problems when they are not written down as shown in Camille and Sonya's situation. In this situation, it is evident that the contract was formed based on terms and conditions used in previous dealings.

As a result, the parties did not discuss the terms and conditions of the new contract but proceeded on the expectation that the terms did not change. The previous course of dealings had a significant impact on the parties' communications and eventually contributed to the dilemma. One of the impacts of prior dealings on the parties' communication is that it contributed to the assumption that previous terms and conditions applied to the new contract.

Consequently, the parties did not discuss all issues relating to the contract, especially the modalities of payment. Secondly, prior course of dealings contributed to poor communication since Sonya answered another phone call and interfered with the ongoing discussions with Camille and resulted in communication breakdown. Breach of Contract Lawsuit Given the current situation, there is likelihood of either party to file a breach of contract lawsuit against the other. Sonya would be successful in a breach of contract lawsuit is brought against her by CARDWARE Inc.

Her success in such a lawsuit would emerge from the fact that she honored or fulfilled her contractual obligations despite the lack of clarity regarding modalities of payment. According to Izzi (2014), there are three major elements for a breach of contract i.e. existence of a valid agreement, breach of the agreement's terms, and damages for breach of contract. Based on these elements, Sonya would be successful in such a lawsuit since Camille did not fulfill her obligations and had proof of damages for the breach of contract.

While the parties did not discuss the modalities of payment, Sonya fulfilled her obligations while Camille did not by changing her mind once the sweaters and hats had been produced. Secondly, Sonya had already incurred costs relating to manufacturing the products based on Camille's expectations. The incurred costs for manufacturing the 500 sweaters in record time is proof of damages for breach of contract in favor of Sonya.

Elements of a Contract In order for a contract to be legally binding and enforceable by law, there are four essential elements that must be present i.e. offer, consideration, acceptance, and mutuality. Offer is the promise made by at least one party for certain obligations while consideration is the value that induces the other party to enter into the agreement in exchange of the specified action ("Elements of a Contract," n.d.).

Acceptance is unambiguous approval of the specification while mutuality implies that parties understand and agree on basic obligations and terms. In this hypothetical situation, these essential elements of a contract have not been satisfied. Actually, none of the essential elements of what constitutes a contract has been satisfied between Candi and Larry. Based on Candi's argument, an offer, which is the foundational element of a contract, was not made by Larry.

Candi sought for Larry's opinion regarding a picture of a dress while Larry proceeded to design a unique extravagant evening gown. Therefore, Candi did not make an offer to Larry to design the evening gown but only sought his opinion regarding a picture of a dress. This essentially means that there was no contract between Candi and Larry for the design of the evening gown. However, there are some exceptions to the basic contractual rules that may support Larry's claim of a contract between him and Candi.

These exceptions that may support Larry's claim primarily.