​

Contracts - Session 14

​

Transcript

SFV Room 200B: Thank you. I’m in. SFV Room 200B: Alright. SFV Room 200B: Yeah, it’s risk. SFV Room 200B: No one. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): He’s not working. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): How’s it always? SFV Room 200B: It’s been a long time. Long time, huh? SFV Room 200B: On Saturday. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Oh, speaking of Saturday, we’re gonna meet Saturday. SFV Room 200B: Do we have a class the following Monday as well? Yes, yes. Mandatory. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Two more sessions, mandatory. SFV Room 200B: I think it’s our last one, huh. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, that Monday is gonna be our last. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Real fast, please. SFV Room 200B: Robert Nazarian? SFV Room 200B: It’s been told. Robert Nazarian: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Gohan, I think she just went to use rescue. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Danny Ramirez? Here. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Ruben Agajanian? Here. SFV Room 200B: Brianna… Tomorrow Estrada? Here. Present. Joshua Zone? Here, Professor. SFV Room 200B: Michael… Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Danielovsky. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Roberto Campos? Here. Carmen Zakarian? Here, Professor. Joseph Kijijian? Hi there, Professor. SFV Room 200B: Lussein Abrahamian? Lusine Abrahamian: Here. SFV Room 200B: Corina Solazar Maria. Karia Salazar: Here. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Yannick Reed. Yanique Reid: hair. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Yesenia Soria? Yessenia Soria: Here, Professor. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Jasmine Purzanjani. Jasmine Pourzanjani: Here, Professor. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Surin Abrahamian? Suren Abrahamyan: Here, Professor. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Cesar Gonzalez? Cesar Gonzalez: Professor. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Jana Masmanian? Yana Mazmanyan: Here, Professor! Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Franz Biomvi. frantzbiamby: Here, Professor. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Madelina Kushkarian. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Melvina Kushkaria. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Isabel Salazar. maddykoshkaryan: Dear Professor Madeline Makushkorian. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Gotcha. Is Solas… Ms. Solas already also here? Isabel Salazar: Yes, I’m here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Tina, Razavi, I saw you. Silvara Safarian. Sevada Safarian: Here, Professor. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Carmen Boschen. Armen Bashian: Professor. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): So, not… SFV Room 200B: Awesome. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sona Khazarin. SFV Room 200B: hospice. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Like, how… Yeah, she was here. 6.34! Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): You’re a cop! Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Pretty easy. Bedwin Igelian. Edwin Aghilian: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Daniel Toklangian. Daniel Toukhlandjian: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Giancarlo Saladon Hernandez, here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Jason… McCain. Jason Makaryan: I’m here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Proofing acknowledgement. SFV Room 200B: Mansi Oyaga. Masie Oyaga: Here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Ilana Caribbean. LIANNA KARIBYAN: Here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Laura Moradian. Laura Muradyan: cure. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): One Esparza. Juan Esparza: Here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’m not Galtzian. Anna Galadzhyan: Here, Professor. SFV Room 200B: Alexander Pavresky. Alex Poberezhskiy: I’m right here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Did you have plants this large? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Ever. Sounds about the size. Really? Yeah. Cool. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): No Zoom, though. That was before my times. Yep. Draw me Halo. Rami Helo: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sabrina Malecon? Sabrina Malekan: Here… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Clarissa Terrasas. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Clarissa Terrasis. Clarissa Terrazas: here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Adrian Kumamoto. Adreanne Kumamoto: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Hello. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Madonna Youssef. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): I think you’re on your campus. Madona Yousef: Yeah, I’m here, sorry. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Anna, Kofiya. I’m here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Arthur was catching. Here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Karen Hernandez-Vazquez. Karen Hernandez: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Arthur Ms. Lumion. arthur mazloumian: Hear it, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Daniel Sheck. Daniel Sheck: Hi, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Hi. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Leonie Nazarian. Here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Victoria Briones. Victoria Briones: Here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Ruben Hunanian, dear Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Rida… Rita Corian? Rita Karaian: Here, Professor! Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Bella Sulahian. Anabella Sulahian: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Serena Nazarth. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’m sorry, Sebastian. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s the second time, then. Not Sabrina. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): We know who you are. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Cameron Smith. Cameron Smith: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Ms. Gilani. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Karo Kushkarian. Karo Koshkaryan: You’re a professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Armin Mirzoyan. Arman Mirzoyan. Here, Professor. That’s the third time. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Cynthia Blauger. Cynthia Llauger: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Posue Flores. Josue Flores: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Paul Gonzalez. Paul Gonzalez: Here, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Prigor Cassabian. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): He’s not here? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Mr. Kasabian. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s hope he’s safe wherever he is. Amanda Odin. Amanda Oden: Here. Madona Yousef: He’s probably running late, because he told me he’s going in person. SFV Room 200B: Gene Dovetianica. Here, Professor. SFV Room 200B: Hi, Class. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Daniel Arman. danielarmin: deer? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Susie… Show her Dumia. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Alona Nazarian. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Alona Nazarian. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Kevin Golovati. Kevin Golovaty: Here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I don’t have Alonia Nazarian, I do not have… SFV Room 200B: Ms. Kushkarion? SFV Room 200B: And I don’t have… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Mr. Kosovia. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Everybody else is accounted for. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Shift that button. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): Coach Cory? She said she was here. maddykoshkaryan: Did you say Madlena Kushkarian, professor? I said I was here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let me see. maddykoshkaryan: Thank you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Oh, yeah, yeah. Be more to present after, yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I think you spoke over somebody else, so… I got you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): All right, very, very good. Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, before we move on with Chapter 7, a couple announcements. First. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We will meet at 10 o’clock sharp here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? On Saturday. Then we have the following Monday. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I believe those are the only classes we’re gonna have. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): After that, the beautiful finals. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Everybody ready for it? I’ll make you ready. Speaker 1 (SFV Room 200B): I think. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): following Monday, you’ll be all ready to go. That’s for sure. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Well, before we start lecture and to go over the cases, I wanted to ask one of my friends, old friends. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Who’s an alumni of this school, very successful lawyer, very good man, very good man. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): To just come up for 4 or 5 minutes and just talk to us about whatever he wants to talk to us about. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This is Susano Coria. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Like me, we didn’t have, the Golden Spoon. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We’ve worked our butt off to where we get, right? Yes. There you go. I… if you guys didn’t know, I was a busboy at 16. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And so, here’s Susan Acoria. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Hello, everyone. Hi. It is an honor and a pleasure to be here with you guys tonight, especially in contracts. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): And I’m so glad my friend, Michael Kay teaches contracts, because this is… this along with evidence, in my opinion, are the two Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Multimed classes that you could take in law school. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Because this will follow you everywhere you go, no matter what path you decide to take in life, what career you decide to do, what field of law you go into, you deal with it every day. So I still have nightmares about awkward acceptance and implied good faith dealings. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I think it was last week that we were talking about the fact that somebody brought this up, and I said contract will follow you. Yes. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): There’s gonna be a lot of classes you’re gonna take, and you’re gonna wonder, do we really need this in life? And, you know, I know some attorneys, and they never talk about this stuff, but contracts, evidence, and for me, torts, because I’m in personal injury, I pay close attention in that class as well. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): But, my name is Suzano Corey, as Mr. Kate already said, I am a president and CEO of Coria Law, and I don’t say that to be boastful, but I say that because I want all of you to one day be able to say the same thing. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): I sat in that chair. Being a law student was one of the toughest times in my life. I wish I could go back and enjoy the process a little bit more. But you’re under a lot of stress. You got midterms, finals. You got life coming at you. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): When you’re a night student, the way you guys are, you’re dealing with a lot of stuff during the day, and then at night, you gotta come to class prepared, not be sleepy, you know, stay up late studying. And it’s a weird period in our lives as students, because we kind of feel like Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Life is passing us by. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): I don’t know if any of you can relate with that. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): We’re at an age where our buddies are getting married, our buddies are having kids, buying their first home, buying a nice car, and we’re kind of left like, I want that, right? You envy that. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): So there are times that you’re gonna second-guess your decision, right? Why am I doing this to myself, right? Why am I, sacrificing myself this much? Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Trust me when I tell you, it pays off at the end. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): It pays off, if you put in the work. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): What you do now, as a law student, is going to determine what you do the rest of your career. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): If you’re disciplined now as a law student, you’re going to be disciplined as an attorney. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): The habits you pick up now and develop as a law student is gonna follow you every… everywhere you go. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): And think about it, as an attorney, We’re not… Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): building anything, no one’s hiring us to sell them a product, right? We’re… people come to us for our knowledge. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): of the law, finding a solution to their problems. So it’s very much a field that, you are, in essence, selling yourself. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Why should I hire you over the next person? What do you have to offer me that that person might not? Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): what’s your experience? And I do think UWLA, UWALA is what we used to call it, I don’t know if you guys call it, but UWalla. But, I do think one thing that UWA does that other schools don’t is that it’s very much a mixed bag of people in different fields. I remember we had school teachers. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): I was a legal assistant myself, working at a law firm. We had, court reporters. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Going to school, wanting to get their JD, and hopefully sitting for the bar, and becoming an attorney at some point. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): But you guys are here for a reason. This is a huge sacrifice, not just for you, but also for your families and loved ones that are supporting you guys. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Stick with it. There are gonna be some tough days, I’m not gonna sugarcoat it, especially around finals. There were days that I didn’t want to get out of my car. I would show up to campus, tired, exhausted, you know, from working a full day. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): You know, cramming some last-minute studying before class. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): But yeah, I would wait till the last minute to get out of my car sometimes. Did you sleep in your car before you… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Well. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): I couldn’t, I couldn’t, you know… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Every single night, for 20 minutes. I did go. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Because I was just so tired. I would go into a room sometimes and just take, like, a power nap, 10-minute power nap before class started, because I was exhausted. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I became the dean of the law fraternity just because they gave us an office, and I had a couch to the fashion. That’s the only reason I became dean. Okay. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): But you’re gonna have those days, too. If you haven’t already, as you go through this process, it’s a 3- or 4-year prog… process for you guys. I did the 4-year program. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): It was tough. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): But… Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): the reward, at the end of the day, you’re up there on that stage, graduating, when you’re sitting for the bar. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): It basically is everything that you’ve worked so hard for in these 3 or 4 years. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): basically coming to a head, and now you just need that one last step, right? For those of you who decide to take the bar. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Not everyone does. I had a lot of classmates that got their degree, and they stopped there. They used that degree for their own, you know, profession, or going into something else. But I do hope all of you guys do take the bar, and become practicing attorneys, and you’ll remember these words. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): You know, if I can do it, anyone can do it. There’s nothing special about me. English was not my first language. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): My parents just worked really hard and pushed me, to get an education. I’m glad they did, because now, after working at a law firm for several years. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): I decided to open my own office in 2011. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Haven’t looked back, it’s been the best decision of my life. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): And I think the experience at UWA, shaped me, in dealing with tough situations and, tough cases and finding solutions for my clients. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): So I commend you all for being here, and I wish you the best of luck. Good luck on your final coming up. And… Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Don’t pay attention to all those cheesy lawyer jokes that you hear. I had a law professor, I’ll leave you guys with this, because I know my time is limited, but I had a law professor that, first day of school told us. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Who’s heard, you know, the best lawyer jokes in here, and people started kind of saying them? Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): And he says, look, they’re all fun and games, but there’s a reason why society, hates attorneys. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Either you’re being sued by one. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): or you’re paying another attorney a lot of money to defend you. So either way, you’re on the losing end. So, it’s very true. You know, you go to parties, and you become a free legal advice machine for your friends and family at parties. Just get used to that stuff. Even as lawsuits, I’m sure you guys are already getting dead with questions. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Even though you guys are still in school, but… Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s give them that disclosure. I’m not an attorney, I can’t give you advice, but you’ll be safe that way. Congratulations, guys, on Class of 2004. People always ask me, how’d you like your UWLA experience? Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): On the way over here, life comes full circle. My son Jacob. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): When I graduated, my wife and I got pregnant with him, and here he is, checking out the school, because he’s thinking about coming here as well, and that’s his girlfriend, Danielle. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Hopefully we can encourage her to come to law school as well. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): But, you know, their life goes on, guys, and you guys will be well, so… Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Congratulations on your journey, good best of luck. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): And, take advantage of the resources that you have, Mr. Cade. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Professor Jane, I’m sorry. He’s a great resource, great connection, and I’m sure he’ll always be there for you guys even after graduation. So, best of luck to everyone. frantzbiamby: Thank you. Thank you. Adreanne Kumamoto: Thank you, soon. Thank you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I can see that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, for some of us, it’s a lot easier to go to law school because you’re financially set. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, because that’s one less thing you have to worry about, and for some of us, that was not the case. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Susanna knows, I wanted $700 to buy the books. I didn’t have $700 to buy books. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): When I first started. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So… If finance… financing or making money means anything, then I think you’re in the right place. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Compared to any other profession you study for 3 years or 4 years. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s not even comparable. I’m sure Dean Zand will tell you the same thing. He probably has already, right? There you go. It’s one of his… yeah. It’s one of his talking. Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Very good. Thank you, sir. Thank you, thank you for all of you being here. I’m very grateful. I love this guy, he’s a sweet guy, and I tell you, we are here for you. I’ve always been for all of my students for the past 11 years or so. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We have had each other’s back, and it literally goes… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Until I’m alive, I plan to do exactly that. I keep telling them, if there’s a problem, call, ask, before you, God forbid, make a mistake, because I do it all the time. I ask. I still do. And I told them about the story of Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you know, screw your ego. Just, I asked my friends, and one time, my wife said, are you sure you want to put this on the attorney portal? I said, yeah, I don’t care. I want to do the right thing. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Me? Second. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Client first. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? So, yeah, we’re always glad to be here for you. Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Going to. SFV Room 200B: Chapter 7. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And we already talked about… obviously, we were at the end of our first semester. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): we’re talking about additional defenses to formation, right? We’re going to have other defenses at the end of the next semester, which has to do with Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): enforcement, but… this semester, we’re only talking about formation. And we talked about, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Capacity, and we talked about, capacity can be raised by either a minor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And we talked about insanity, we talked about necessities of life being an exception. We said at common law, minors were, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Anyone under the age of 21, but they are now 18. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We talked about insanity, we talked about cognitive test and product tests, right? Hopefully there’s no questions about any of that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So now… Let’s talk about mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We have two types of mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You have a unilateral mistake, meaning one party makes a mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Or both parties make a mistake, which is… SFV Room 200B: mutual mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And this mistake has to do with, certain definite terms, CDTs, right? It has to be of an important Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): nature, not mistake of some little, you know, shipping date off by 5 minutes. We’re talking about certain definite terms, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Mistake can act as a defense to formation. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): As long as, and this is the part that you must Put to memory. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): As long as there was no assumption of risk. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): as long as there was no assumption of risk, and I know one of the cases that we’re going to cover talks about that, but… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If a party makes a mistake, but he had assumed the risk. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Then he’s stuck, regardless of the fact that the other party knew or didn’t know. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, so assumption of the risk is one thing that you have to keep in mind. One of the other things that will come up is ratification, when it comes to what? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): When does ratification come up? frantzbiamby: Is it one you have to, make… make good of the contract, of your performance of the contract? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, a contract that was… that is otherwise voidable may become an enforceable contract if you later ratify Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): by conduct, or by your statements, right? So, the two things that most law students miss when they talk about defenses Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): is this assumption of the risk and ratification. They just forget to talk about it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Gratification, in my opinion, is a little easier to spot. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I hope. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But assumption of the risk is something that you always have to talk about. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): For sure, okay? So, unilateral mistake. Let me give you… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah. Can you give an example of the assumption of risk? Yes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Simple. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You’re supposed to ship to Paris. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s the contract. It says you’re supposed to ship to Paris. You think it’s Paris, Texas, because there is a city called, or county called Paris. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Texas. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They thought it’s Paris… France. France. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But the contract says you assume all the risk. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): with shipping. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Now, if you mistakenly thought that you’re supposed to ship to Paris, Texas, there’s a good chance that the court might say. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You have to assume the risk, because you did it in the contract, and you have to pay, fork over all the money, ship it over to… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Paris, France, regardless of the fact that you made an innocent mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And the party may have known. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But assumption of the risk is if the contract literally says, you assume the risk with shipping to the destination, that may be a factor, right? I just came up with that. I saw a cheesy Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Series, I think, on Prime. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And that’s when I learned there is a Paris, Texas. There’s a Paris, California. No clue. There’s a Paris, California? Oh, I didn’t remember. I’ll wait for the next cheesy movie. I’ll go for E and two R. What was that again? Spelled differently. Really? How’s it spelled? P-E-R-R-I-S. R-I-S. Oh. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This one, I think, was Paris, like P-A-R-I, yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Is function or risk the same thing as, like, conscious ignorance? Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Conscious ignorance. Someone has limited knowledge about the contract, what they treat you for? No, I wouldn’t. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): say that, because… no, because assumption of the risk is you’re literally saying. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If anything happens, I assume all responsibility. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? Another assumption of this that comes up sometimes is Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I think you had your hand up, right? I’ll try to ask for the completion of the sentence, but it came back to me. Another assumption of the risk comes in construction. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Many times in construction, The, the property owner, if it’s a big construction, big project, usually their lawyers Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Put in the contract that the contractor assumes all the risk. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, if there’s an earthquake and the whole thing is destroyed, You gotta rebuild. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If you suddenly hit some… something on the ground, maybe some gas or something coming up. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You assume all the risk. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They just basically shift over any mistake that might happen. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Onto the other party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? And say, if something like that comes up, you deal with it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Did you have a question? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Oh, I say I was going to ask for the completion of the sentence. You said mistake can be a defense as long as. Speaker 14 (SFV Room 200B): There is no assumption about the. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): correct? Yes. Yeah. Yes. I said mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): As it relates to certain definite terms, is a potential defense to formation. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): As long as there is no assumption of the risk. SFV Room 200B: Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But… Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Unilateral mistake. Unilateral mistake is a defense to formation if the non-mistaken party knew or should have known of the mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So a unilateral mistake is only an acceptable form of defense if the other party Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Either knew or should have known of the mistake. SFV Room 200B: So, let’s say… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you thought Paris, Texas. They knew that you think Paris, Texas. They’re like, don’t say anything about it. Let’s just put Paris Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): will force him to deliver to Paris, France. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That would be a defense that you could raise, because… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The other party knew or should have known. Yes, ma’am? Just to clarify, both mutual mistake and unilateral mistake are considered voidable. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Right? They’re not. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): void. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I would say voidable, absolutely, yeah. They don’t automatically void a contract, though. Okay. Yeah, and we’ll talk about it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I think the, one of the cases gives, actually, a fantastic Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): definition for all of you to use. Now, mutual or bilateral mistake is always a defense to formation. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Unilateral or bilateral mistake is always a defense to formation. Now, why do we say voidable? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s learn that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s not memorize it, let’s understand it. Why? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Because you can make it void through certain actions by either party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s not automatic. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): automatically void. It’s void if one of the parties takes certain steps to make it void. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So it’s… it’s… you’re saying it’s voidable. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): unless… if somebody takes a step to then proceed to make it void. Yes, and if they don’t. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): And it possibly could be valid. Okay. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): I was gonna say, it’s not a completely invalid contract. It means that the contract is. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): still good, however, if you change things around, it won’t completely void the contract. There is things that can be changed to still, complete the, Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): The… what the main objective of the formation is, yeah. Okay. The main objective of the… Anybody else? Sir? Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): Avoidable, because sometimes it’s up to the trier of fact, like the judge or the jury, to determine if it should be lawyered. Yeah. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): I think it’s, voidable, because I think, it could lead to the fact that people would. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): make contracts, use the benefits, and then suddenly, like, intentionally, it will come back and say, like, oops, it was a mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But the bottom line is this. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Why would it be void if nobody raises the issue? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s say there is a mutual mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Or a, unaro mistake, but neither party ever raises that issue. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So why would the contract be automatically void? Makes no sense! SFV Room 200B: Do you understand? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sometimes you may say, oops, I made a mistake, but you know what? Screw it, I’ll just deal with it. It’s worth it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Or I don’t want to litigate. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Make sense? So it’s always voidable unless you raise that issue. With a trial of that. So it’s essentially valid until one of the other parties decides to take action. Yeah, well, the contract otherwise is a valid contract unless… yeah, absolutely, unless a party takes a step Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): to prove that there was either a mutual mistake, or you’re not a mistake, right? It’s very different from a void contract. What’s a void contract? Like a fraudulent contract? Something done. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): That was don’t prove fraud. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, but even stronger than that. An illegal contract? An illegal contract. Very good. A contract to disperse cocaine. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Seriously, think about it. Did you take that to court and say, Your Honor, he didn’t pay me? Right? I was the best dispersal. I covered the whole Southern California in 2 days. He doesn’t want to pay me. That’s automatically a void contract, ab initio, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You don’t have to go to court and raise any issues, it’s already void. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): contract to, to, to sell miners. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I mean, the most obvious, right? Illegal contracts. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Somebody had a hand up. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We’re good? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Misrepresentation. Misrepresentation is different from fraud. It could be negligent misrepresentation. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Misrepresentation has to be of a material fact. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Material facts are… CDT. That’s right. CDT, certain definite terms, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, whether it’s intentional, which is aka fraud. SFV Room 200B: or negligence. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): There was a due, now, maybe a defense to formation as long as the other party, in fact, the other party acted reasonably. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, mistake is a defense to formation as long as the other party acted reasonably. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I want to make a distinction. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): between… Misrepresentation that is intentional, fraudulent, Versus negligent. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Negligent misrepresentation, you have to have a duty to the other party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which I think we have a case in here, right? Wasn’t this the woman that married the guy that totally screwed him out of everything, and… right? That case. That’s the one I’m talking about. So, that… she… did she have a duty to the husband? Hell yeah. SFV Room 200B: Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): by virtue of the marriage, right? You had a duty. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): She had to do it to her husband. So… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): negligent misrepresentation only if the party had a duty to the other party, right? A duty of… SFV Room 200B: To be candor, to be honest, to be truthful. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Et cetera, et cetera, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We call it the duty of good faith and fair dealing, as an example. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But intentional misrepresentation does not require duty. You can… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): screw anybody in a contract, and that may be, what, fraud, right? Intentional misrepresentation. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which, when we file a lawsuit, we usually call it fraud. But I’ve seen intentional misrepresentation, followed by, you know, causes of action for negative infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, etc, etc, which I think you will learn in your tort class. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, now fraud. SFV Room 200B: Fraud in the factors. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Fraud in the fact. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If the party asserting the defense did not know Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If the party asserting the defense did not know, or… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If the party asserting the defense did not know nor. SFV Room 200B: Should they have known? SFV Room 200B: They were entering into a contract. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): By signing the document, the contract is void. SFV Room 200B: Not voidable. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’ll give you an example. SFV Room 200B: Yes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If a party asserting the defense did not know, nor did he have any reason to know that he was entering into a contract. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): By signing the document. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The contract is void. SFV Room 200B: not voidable. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The most plain example is a blank piece of paper. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You put that in front of somebody and say, sign the bottom of this paper. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And then later on, you put the details of the contract into that piece of paper. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So the person didn’t actually sign a contract, the person signed something else. Maybe a blank piece of paper, maybe just one sentence, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s called fraud in the factum. In other words, in fact, it was fraud, and so the contract is void. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Not void of both. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The most tested of all these defenses, of course, is none of those that I just talked about. It’s the rest. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Wow. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The sweet subject of duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What types of duress do we have? Physical and economic. Physical and economic. Very, very good. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, the rest can be physical, all economical. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But in either case, the contract was formed without the subjective intent of the party asserting the defense. So let me repeat this definition for you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Maybe physical, or… economic, But in either case, the contract was formed without the subjective intent of the party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): asserting the defense. In other words, the person was pushed or forced Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): to sign the contract, right? And we will find out how much push are we talking about. Not a little bit, not like, hey, you know, if you don’t sign this thing. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): your life is going to be a living hell, and you know, I’m going to be by your door every day. That’s not enough. There’s a lot more than that is required, and the case law will make it very clear, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Physical duress. Let’s… let’s find out what that is. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Physical duress is a subjective defense. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): As opposed to the objective theory of contract that we talk about, here we literally are getting into the brain, right, the mind of the person who’s raising the defense to find out if the defense actually did exist. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? A subjective defense in which the asserting party, meaning the party that is raising the defense, must establish. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Meaning, the party raising the defense has the… the, duty, has the burden of proof. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That they were completely broken down. SFV Room 200B: To the point that the contract was not their choice. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’ll repeat the definition. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): a subjective defense In which the asserting party must establish Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That they were completely broken down. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): To the point that the contract was not their choice. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Physical duress, usually by professors is associated with a gun to somebody’s head. Like, we’re talking not, like, you know, I’m gonna be here every day, I’m gonna be a pain in the butt, I’m gonna ring your doorbell every day until you sign… no, when we’re talking about physical defense, what duress, we’re talking about Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Literally, physically forcing someone to sign something. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Got it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): economic duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): which is always tested. Physical duress is easy to see, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We’re not gonna test that. Yeah, I’ll beat you up, unless you science. We’re not gonna test that, that’s a joke, right? We’re gonna test you on… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): economic duress. Why do we test on economic duress? Does anybody know before I even give the definition? Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): I’m assuming because if it’s unfair… if it’s clearly unfair to one party, then how can a reasonable person agree to that term, unless if they have no other choice but to agree to it, for whatever may be the reason? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, I’m with you. Who, who is, who is… Providing the duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Is it a third party, or is it the opposing party? Opposing party? Yeah. That’s where we usually test. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you will see real duress, economic duress, but it’s coming from somebody else. The guy is about to fight bankruptcy because his life is in shambles, and then this contract comes along, and he’s forced to sign it, but not forced by the defendant. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Forced by his own circumstances. That is not a defense. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And every time, 30%, They fall. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): 25% of the… I swear, of the class will fall for that answer, because it’s multiple choice, and not enough time, and bing, they mark, oh yeah, I see economic duress, wrong answer. SFV Room 200B: Got it? So let me give you a definition for that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Economic duress is a subjective defense In which the asserting party must establish Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That there was an existing contractual relationship And the other party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Refuses to perform their contractual obligation. SFV Room 200B: And there are no reasonable alternative choices available. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): A subjective defense in which The asserting party Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Must establish that there was an existing contractual relationship And the other party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Refuses to perform their contractual obligation Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And there are no reasonable alternative choices available. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Reasonable alternative choices. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So… SFV Room 200B: I think we have a case. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I know we have a case in the casebook that basically closes the door for the plaintiff to get substitute goods from another vendor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? So he… Forcibly agrees to pay the higher price for the same goods to the same supplier. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Because otherwise, if you can’t get the goods from somewhere else. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And all he has to do, by the way, is reasonable measures, right? He doesn’t have to go to Timbuktu, he doesn’t have to go to India or somewhere far to find the supplies. All he has to do is look around the corner. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): and see if there is a reasonable means of obtaining the same goods somewhere else. If he can, this defense of economic duress will not apply. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But if he can’t. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): his supplier’s the sole supplier of the goods, right? Through reasonable means. Then he can pay the higher price and then sue. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): For what? Economic duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): to get back the money that he was forced to discourage. Make sense? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yes. I’m just curious, that blank piece of paper example you talked about, does that happen. Speaker 7 (SFV Room 200B): in practice where people just sign something and then the other party will just add terms. You’d be surprised. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You’d be surprised how many people do that. It’s pretty crazy. And it’s usually family members. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’ve just… I don’t know if you’ve come up with this, but I’ve practiced for 27 years. I’ve seen so many of these. It’s usually family members that basically say, oh, Daddy, sign here so I can give it to the hospital that, you know, when you’re going for your colonoscopy, in case something happens, I can tell them Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): To pull the plug, don’t pull the plug, because the daddy wants that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What he doesn’t know is that he just signed off Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): half of his life in that same piece of paper. And it’s… yeah. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): I’ve seen that situation come up with contractors, who will go to a home or something and say, hey. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): There’s a lot of unforeseeable things that might need extra material. Just sign here, the details aren’t really clearly spelled out, and the person will sign it, trusting the contractor, because they were recommended by someone they know, and the contractor will have them sign, basically, blank contracts. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): language afterwards, you know. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’ve seen lawyers do it. I’m sorry to say. I’ve seen lawyers do it. So I always tell, and I think I’ve mentioned this in this class. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You initial every page. I always tell my clients… I’m sorry? Initial every page? Yeah, thank you. I have mentioned in this class. I always tell my clients, don’t leave the lawyer’s office unless you get a copy of every single page that is supposed to be your retainer agreement. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Because… and I make everybody sign every initial every page. Exactly. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So that they can’t say, oh, I never saw this page. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He switched this page on me. No, I didn’t, it’s your initial right there. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know? If they’re docusigning it, they’re probably spending 10-15 minutes docusigning, at least, because I have so many initials. And it protects me, and it protects my client, right? We both understand what the hell we signed, I hope. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? So, yeah, happens a lot, and unfortunately, it happens a lot. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Otherwise, it wouldn’t be a defense. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? We wouldn’t be talking about it. Okay, so, economic duress. We look to see Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Usually, you will see there is a contract between two parties already. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And then one party says, for whatever reason, look, I can’t do this, I can’t supply, I can’t do, I can’t perform, I can’t paint, I can’t bring the material unless you pay more money. Now, sometimes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You need to be cognizant of the fact that that may be a… what? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What is that when you try to change the terms of the contract? Modification. Very good. It may be a modification, right? Then you have to see if it’s a fair and reasonable modification. UCC allows Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): a reasonable, fair modification without the need for… Consideration. Consideration. Very good. So. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This is how we test this stuff, to see if you distinguish duress from, oh, okay, it looks like something really bad happened. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): this guy had no clue this might happen, and they’re attempting reasonably to come up with a modified contract so that they can both survive and get the job done. Make sense? As opposed to, I’m gonna stick it dry. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Got it? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Good. So, that’s how we’re gonna test it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Undue influence. SFV Room 200B: Get a case like that in here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Undue influence. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): First, you have to look to see, was the party asserting the defense Susceptible to undue influence. SFV Room 200B: Susceptibility is key number one. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Was the party asserting the defense of undue influence susceptible to undue influence of the other party? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And the other party must have both the opportunity and the disposition. SFV Room 200B: To exert undue influence. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): The other party must have, but again. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): both. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The opportunity and disposition. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): To exert undue influence, which resulted in an unnatural transaction. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’ll repeat the definition, but don’t worry me, we have a case in the case book that talks. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): talks about that specific. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Usually, There is a relationship between these two parties. There are husband and wife, there are… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, parents, children, whatever, you know, there’s usually a relationship of That creates that, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): opportunity and disposition, okay? So, undue influence. Was the other party asserting the defense susceptible to undue influence? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Of the other party, Who had both the opportunity and disposition To exert undue influence. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which, in fact, resulted In an unnatural transaction. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What does unnatural mean? SFV Room 200B: Unreasonable. Totally unreasonable. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Totally unreasonable. Unnatural means no court reasonably can say, this is fair. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): like that woman, I think, that took all of the husband’s assets, right? All of it, pretty much, in one of the cases that we’re gonna… we’re gonna do. I don’t know if you remember, but we’re gonna talk about it. I was gonna say… Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): I know we’re gonna go over the case shortly, but it’s very simple Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): terms, a way for explaining some of the influence, because I kind of got confused. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Undue influence usually happens between parties that know each other, have a relationship with each other, and one has some superior Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Authority? Authority, or… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): mentally superior over the other party, right? So one party obviously is susceptible to this undue influence, and the other party’s using it as an excuse, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And it happens, I tell you in real life how it happens. Sorry to say this, but I just have to tell you, I come up with just one example. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So I don’t want anybody to… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): think bad about the example in any way, shape, or form. I represented the guy, he was 72, I think, at the time. She was 43. She married him shortly thereafter. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): She says, I want to have Mercedes-Benz. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): 500 SL at the time. It was, like, 110,000 bucks or something. He says, okay, fine, but, you know, I don’t have that much money, and Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So that’s the first thing, that’s… that’s not undue influence, that’s love. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Is it the same thing? Then? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): I do it. SFV Room 200B: I could eat it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What would we do without you? Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): Good thing you’re teaching toward the contracts. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It went on and on and on. So what happens is, they go to the CPA right after marriage, right? And she says. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): he’s losing it cognitively. I have to take over the financial affairs. He makes… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): this… she makes the CPA complete paperwork, yeah, giving her authority over all of the supervision over the assets. That’s… and he idiotically… he knew Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He knew, but he was susceptible. He wanted the care, the love, the attention, the… whatever you want to call it, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He signs off on it. The undo. And you’re not 72 yet, just wait. We’ll see what you do. We have a case like that, though, right? I’m sorry. We do, but the one I’m telling you is a real-life situation. So, after she takes over, and she starts… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): One of the assets, I think, suddenly was a grantee to her brother, and the CPA goes, -oh, something definitely is wrong. He calls me, because he was my CPA as well, and he goes, Michael, what do I do in a situation like this? I said, just tell him straight to come and see me. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And he said, I can’t do that. I said, well, then have both of them sit in front of you and say. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This doesn’t look right to me, and I want you to consult a lawyer. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And of course, he, in the presence of the wife, says, you’re out of your mind, she can do whatever she wants, she’s… I trust her 100%. This goes on for, like, another couple of years before, yeah, before a couple of hundred thousand disappears, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I’ll give you another example. I’ll give you a better example of undue influence. No joke. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I represent a CPA right now. I don’t know why it’s No disrespect to the city. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But this one, I’m representing the CPA. I think I told you guys that he took over a million dollars from my client. Did I mention… I did mention that, right? Yeah. No, from my client. I’m sorry, I’m representing him. I’m representing the CPA. He took over a million dollars from his client. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Shortly after he dropped it, the clients. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): as soon as he hired me to defend the civil lawsuit, he started getting phone calls from the police department. Then the detective spoke to me, and I said, look, my client can’t speak, you know, whatever. My client is in another country, right? Let’s put it this way. And all the money’s gone, right? And he, I found out, is not the only victim. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): all susceptible, because they were in their late 80s, all trusted their CPA of 30-plus years, all signed contracts, and according to the police, the detective. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They all went with him! Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): To the bank and transferred all of their assets, all of their cash, to him. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I swear to God, I’m not joking with you. They have the video footage, and the detective is like, I don’t understand, I’m like, there’s… it’s not a crime. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You have… it is, in my opinion, but I said, it is not a crime. They chose to put the money in his Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): care. Care. Right? And his explanation, of course, is that some family members, shady sons and daughters and whatever, and brothers and sisters, came to basically take everything, and I wanted to protect them. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, they created a trust and gave me… gave the money to me to hold it in trust. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I’m like, do you have a trust document signed? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Nope. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Oh my gosh. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Would you think that’s undue influence? Yes, yes. I would think so. Was one of them susceptible? Absolutely. The elderly, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Was the other party… did he have the opportunity? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Of course he did. He’s managing all their finances. In fact, I have a stack of this many checks that he actually wrote, paying from Dish Network to their phone bill to this to that. In other words, he had total opportunity. Right. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And then, of course, did he have the disposition? He absolutely did. He’s the CPA, he’s the knowledgeable guy, he’s the… you get my point? So, if a fact pattern like this presents itself. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you know how to deal with it, right? But I won’t give that to you in the final, because I just… so we have to think of something. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): That’s why elders have a special filing DA. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Because they’re such a protected class. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Absolutely, they do. You’re absolutely correct, they do. And this detective was specifically looking into that elder abuse, elder financial abuse, which, unfortunately, I’ve defended too many, usually from the sons, believe it or not. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): their own son. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Not so much the daughters, the sons. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I don’t know, what is it about the Suns? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Gotta tell you. Swear to God. Happens a lot. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Most of them end up in CCV, in that court, and… I’ve done too many. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Very unfortunate. And of course, when the father questioned the son, he pushed him into the glass table. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And the father had Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): 15, 16, huge lacerations. Oh, my God. So, yeah, never got any better, got worse. Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): unconscionability. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Another defense to the formation of contract. Unconscionable fees. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which is what we talked about, totally one-sided, right? The court literally says, this is… this is just… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This is beyond, conscious, right? Although objectively and subjectively agreed to the terms. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The terms are so unconscionable. SFV Room 200B: Now, the core of law. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Will not enforce the contract. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, although subjectively and objectively agreed to. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The terms are so unconscionable that the court of law will refuse to enforce the contract. SFV Room 200B: wholly one-sided. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I think an example of that… I mean, I think this woman, the wife in this case, that would do… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Has committed all of these offenses that we’re talking about. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yes, no. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): What made him realize after those years that my wife This undue love is… Who? That old man. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the one that I represented, honestly, after he convinced him to talk to a lawyer. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Nice. And I… it’s, you know, when you… I have… thank God I haven’t reached that age yet. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Every single person that came to my office recently, and I think I mentioned, they said they got a call from the FBI. First, they got a call from Citibank. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Did I mention that? No. They… this is going on right now. A lot. Going on a lot. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And unfortunately, it hit the Armenian community a lot as well. It did. Which one? What is this? Citibank. I’ll tell you right now. They get a call from some representative claiming to be the Citibank representative. It says, oh, there’s some fraud going on with your bank account, we need to stop it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And the guy goes, he has my personal information already, and yeah, I do have a Citibank banking. SFV Room 200B: And he… so he starts cooperating. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And he says, shortly thereafter, the conversation goes something along, the FBI has to look into this, sir, you need to come to the FBI office. And he goes, I can’t, you know, come to the FBI. What are you talking about? No problem, sir, we’ll set up a Zoom meeting for you with the FBI agent, who’s gonna interview you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I swear to God. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And as soon as I heard that the FBI agent was in uniform, I said, -oh. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You got screwed. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He’s like, no, no, no, let me explain to you, Mr. Kate, I mean, I just paid for a consult. I’m like, listen, you have been screwed. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Did you give your information? Yeah, I did. Did you give your social? Yes. Bank account? Yes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): One of them paid $200,000. Paid. And I said, listen, why did you get scared of the FBI? Have you committed any crime in your life? He’s like, no! Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I swear to God, I’m telling you the truth, it’s… The older you get. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sometimes, you just can’t think straight. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And if… you are definitely susceptible. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Merry. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Especially with AI. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): That, too. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s next. They’re gonna get so many people that way, including all of us, if they can. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Oh, no wonder. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Right, right? Speaker 7 (SFV Room 200B): would see, like, Elon Musk donating crypto or something, and think they’re… Precisely. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Excuse me. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I mean, I’m telling you, the most obvious is the ones that the most intelligent lawyers send me clips that they… I know it’s AI. Elon Musk never said that. I’m like, dude, are you stupid? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Come on. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Actually. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But, you know what? And it’s gonna get a hell of a lot worse. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): I do want to say something. Some of this… I’ve taken reports for people who have lost in crypto and the gift card scams and all that, and let me tell you, you would think that surgeons from Cedars-Sinaight would be some of the smartest doctors, but they are the dumbest people I’ve ever met. That’s true. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): In fact. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): No, in fact, let me tell you… Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): anesthesiologist, and the other was, like, some type of neurological surge… neurosurgeon, something like that. And I said, what made you fall for it? And they said, it’s the best human emotion, and it’s the… also the worst one, fear. Once you instill fear in someone, everything goes out the door. 100%. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I think every one of these guys that got screwed, it was exactly that. It’s all about fear. I represented an older woman who both of her sons threw her out of the house. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Made her homeless, took all of her assets, both her own sons. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And, I got a call from a local church. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And the church basically told me that she’s… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We’re giving her shelter. This is what’s going on. I couldn’t believe it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I found out that her own sons, it was all what? Fear. We’re gonna kick you out unless you put everything in our home, in our name, right now. Otherwise, you’re out on the street. And she did. And as soon as she did that, they got rid of her. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, susceptible, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That was another example that came to my mind, but I think we’ve had enough. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, so we talked about oncology. Armen Bashian: I would love to add just one small one. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, I worked in banking for… Armen Bashian: Close to 20 years, and… I had a client I’ll never forget. Armen Bashian: That gave $5 million away. Armen Bashian: to, investments in South America, or something. And we froze his accounts, and he cussed at me several times, as we were investigating Armen Bashian: And he was like, you know, kind of, what do you think? I’m stupid? Like, I would never fall for a scam like that, and da-da-da-da. Armen Bashian: And I said, sir, just please give us… just give us a couple of days, let us just look into it. And, you know, because he was such a large client, they just said, you know what, if it’s him, it’s… you authenticated who he is, just let him send the money what he wants, whatever. Armen Bashian: And 3 days later, sure enough, Total scam. Armen Bashian: And he lost his entire retirement. SFV Room 200B: Oh my god. SFV Room 200B: Yes. I was with the, I met with the District Attorney of San Diego this past weekend. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): And she was telling us how the most, prosecuted crimes right now are elderly abuse crimes through, cyber, cyber attack. She said that, back then, we were able to say, you know what, like, the, I don’t know, their grandkids, their kids, they would say, don’t pick up, like, out-of-state or out-of-country phone calls. He’s like, now that they’re doing it with their own area code. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): they all fall for it. And then there’s, I guess she was telling us a story that one of these, elderly grandmas, she lost her entire retirement, including her husband’s retirement, and then they were able to link it to a beneficiary account through a bank that had their kids. They lost all of that money, too. So it’s like, it’s an ongoing thing. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): And it’s really, really bad, especially the out-of-country. And then I guess now they’re, the federal government is involved, because there’s so much happening, so they can control it, because… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): they can. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): I don’t… yeah, he said, especially with, crypto and all that stuff, it’s very, very hard to track down. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I mentioned the phone number that this guy told me that I… I said. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): When they said, you have to talk to the FBI, did you call the FBI? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He goes, yeah. I said, let me guess. They gave you the phone number to call, right? He said, yes. And I did call that number, 213 number, and it was FBI. I said, sure it was. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He didn’t believe me. His son forced him to come see me, one of them. I’m not kidding. His son said, I forced him to come here, pay you so you can tell him. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Thank God he didn’t… I said, go close all of your accounts right now, immediately freeze, you know, your credit, etc, etc, file the police report. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s very unfortunate. So we talk about this to tell you if you have elderly parents or grandparents, please tell them now. Don’t do anything. Don’t do anything. I don’t care how smart you are. They get the surgeon. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Oh, by the way, the doctors, they’re all in crypto. Like, every single person that calls me with crypto, either a dentist or a doctor. Yeah. Armen Bashian: They also have the worst credit. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Something happened. They can’t get the money anymore. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): When I, anytime someone question… when I call a victim or an informant, and I ask them a question, and they’re hesitant, I tell them, I’m like, okay, I want you to look up on Google the number to the sheriff’s station, and you call, and you do it all by yourself. That’s the way it should be, yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Absolutely, if you want to be sure. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. It’s very sad. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It is, it’s, I just can’t… yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Very, very excited. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Imagine you work all your life, and then you become homeless. Yeah, and no one can do anything about it. No. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): No. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): These actors are usually in another country, so good luck getting them. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And did you hear about the people that are… that live in California that had a big scam going on in Germany? No. 300… they stole $350 million from German citizens, or whatever, or they live here? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They all got arrested. Yeah, they’re all about to be extradited back to Germany to be prosecuted. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): You mean executed? I’m an idiot, you’re in the wrong spot. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): What? Execute it? No, no, no, I hope that helps. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I mean, I hope yes, but no, they won’t. Did I say executed? No, that’s what you said executed. No, you changed. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): And, no, because he… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He thinks like me. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Exactly what I would do. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Cool. On the side of the road, absolutely. You’re all record, Professor! Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): Hi, truthful. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Turn off the video. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): There’s more… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): sec. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Oh my gosh. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): All right, let’s go to Wachovian versus Fullerton County National Bank. Paul Gonzalez: I could do this one. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): May I please have your name? Paul Gonzalez: Paul Gonzalez? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Mr. Gonzalez, it’s all yours, sir. Paul Gonzalez: Alright, this is COVID-10 v. Fullerton County National Bank and Trust Company. This is United State District Court of New York in 95. Paul Gonzalez: So, Stephen Barker and Alfred Cheney started a business to restore old buildings. To fund their work, they borrowed money from the bank. The bank promised to help sell one of their buildings, but later removed the plaintiffs from the property and took control of it. Paul Gonzalez: The bank then pressured them into signing the agreement, giving up their rights to sue. The bank threatened to stop lending them money and to demand immediate repayment of all loans if they refused. Feeling they had no choice, the plaintiff signed the agreement, but later sued the bank for fraud. Paul Gonzalez: The issue at hand is, can the contract be canceled if it was signed because someone was forced or threatened? Paul Gonzalez: Here, a contract. Paul Gonzalez: that is signed because of force or threat can be canceled. However, the person claiming the duress must show that they had no reasonable alternative but to sign, and that the other party was responsible for threats or pressure. If the person later accepts the contract benefits, they may lose the right to cancel it. Paul Gonzalez: Thus, the plaintiffs claim they only signed the agreement because the bank threatened to cut off their funding and demand full repayment of the loans. If this is true and they are truly had no other choice, the contract could be considered signed under dress. However, if it’s unclear whether they signed willingly. Paul Gonzalez: Whether they knew they could still sue, or whether they later accepted any benefits from the agreement. Paul Gonzalez: These uncertainties mean that the facts need to be decided at trial. Paul Gonzalez: So, to conclude, yes, the contract can be canceled if it was signed under force or threat. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Very good, very good, thank you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, page 459, second full paragraph. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): under duress, the court first addresses the issue of duress. Under the federal common law of release. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Plaintiffs must establish three elements in order to show economic duress, sufficient to make the release voidable. Voidable. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Buddy? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What? Plaintiff involuntarily accepted defendant’s terms. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In other words, it was not volitional, I was forced to do it. Number two, circumstances permitted no alternative to acceptance of defendant’s terms. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Number three, the circumstances were the result of coercive act by defendant. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): By defendant, not by a third party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? So, I thought that was a very good start, and then the court on the bottom of the same page says, viewing the evidence in light most favorable to the plaintiff, the court concludes that a material question of fact exists on the issue of whether plaintiffs signed the release voluntarily. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Meaning, the court is trying to say, this is not going to be a summary judgment situation, it has to go to trial, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Because the parties dispute whether the bank promised to apply the lien proceeds to… what is it? Hip J’s debt? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In the return for Hip J’s assignment of the mechanics lien, it can be held as a matter of law, that the release was freely bargained for by the plaintiff. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Then, the most important part of this case, and I think this is the reason why the case is here, is the discussion of ratification, okay? Because once you find duress, you have to see what happened afterwards. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Did either party who was subjected to the duress later ratify the same contract? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Either by conduct or by words, right? By deeds or words. So now the court says on Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Page 461, third full paragraph, the court says, defendant next argues that, even assuming that the question of fact exists concerning the issue of duress, there’s no question that plaintiff ratified the release by accepting these benefits. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which is by conduct. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Namely, that the plaintiffs would not be sued on the promissory notes, which they had personally guaranteed. Then the court goes on to say, here’s a rule, by the way, that I got from this case. This is the fourth full paragraph on 461. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): A contract executed under duress is not per se, void. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): but merely voidable, the answer to your question, or somebody who raised the question. Restatement Second of Contract Section 175. Thus, once the duress is removed. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The party claiming duress must choose either to preemptively repudiate the contract, or to acquisite to its terms pursuant to the doctrine of ratification. In other words, object to it, pursuant to the doctrine of ratification, or Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Has to do what? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Deputy, immediately, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So now, the court says. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s funny, another reason that I wanted to mention why it’s voidable and not void is because of ratification, right? If it’s void, what does that mean? The contract is dead. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? You can’t revive it. It’s dead. You have to enter into a new contract, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But it’s voidable, therefore, you can gratify it. In order to ratify a contract obtained under duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): These, in my opinion, should all go into your nose. The duress must be removed, and the aggrieved party must Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Intent to ratify the contract. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Intention to ratify may be signified in many ways, including intentionally accepting benefits under the contract, Remaining silent. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Or. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): What the hell is this? I couldn’. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): be seen in the contract for a long period of time after an opportunity exists to have it declared void. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In other words, again, remaining into the contract and receiving the fruits of it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): or acting upon the contract by affirmatively acknowledging it, or performing under it. In other words, look at the conduct of the party. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And a statement of the party to see if they ratified the contract at a later time. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? So, I would put this… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): ratification. I don’t think you need this much of a writing. All you need to do is, you can say a contract that is voidable because of economic or physical duress may be ratified once the duress is Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Over and done with, and the party Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): remains within the contract, or receives goods and benefits of it, does not object to it, etc, etc, yes. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): the rest removed? What does that mean exactly? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): In other words, the. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The court basically says, once you now have the opportunity to, for example, object and say, I don’t no longer want to sign with this bank, but you still do. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): when there’s no more duress, then it’s free will, right? Or in the case example that I gave, where the supplier says, you have to pay me extra dollar more so I can supply the goods, and you do, because there’s no other supplier, right, within a reasonable reach. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): to purchase from, but once that duress is over, in other words, there are 5 other suppliers, but you keep purchasing at that same price from this supplier, the duress is removed. So you can’t no longer say, I want my money back. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Because you could have easily went to another supplier, right? So… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The moment is removed, or it’s complete, then you can ratify the contract. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Any questions before we go to then… oh, no, actually, 743. Let’s call it break. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s come back at 8 o’clock. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): 8 o’clock chart. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Can you refer to traditional… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s wait a couple of minutes. Speaker 7 (SFV Room 200B): So, being short too difficult. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s AHR. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s 801 show. No, let’s wait for her to show up. Details matter. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Just now, literally. SFV Room 200B: I’m not good. SFV Room 200B: Professional. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Thank you, ma’am. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Think about that, but that’s the truth. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): You’re, like, a calm fighter. SFV Room 200B: I don’t know what I was in my fault. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Because when I started working for that firm as a… Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): And then when I didn’t… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Like, my boss literally called me up then. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Come to my office. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Those are all in, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I come to his office, I see a young guy in the past response. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): There you go. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): With an older. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): gentlemen. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Sometimes I’m a fake person. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You go to the facility tomorrow? A lot of hats. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. I’m a psychologist and a socialist. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): It’s not. It’s a criminal case. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So I said, come on, I’ve never done one. He goes, it’s okay, you’ll learn. I wish. It’s cool. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): I swear to God. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And then he opened the briefcase, I’m not kidding. He said, one of those Rolexes, or whatever. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Why don’t you? My boss. Oh, your boss. My boss. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’m like, I was the cleanest guy on… I was like, no, no, no, no, no. He goes, if you don’t, I will… Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Zoom. SFV Room 200B: No, I have not told U.S. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Anybody has come. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sevag is. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): So it’s evil. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s one of us. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): His best clients. I represented. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So many vines. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): So much? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): And I was like, okay, this is a good thing. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I like this here. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): It’s very… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s fine, but that’s how it started. Plus, I was in L.A. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): on your eyes. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): The amount of phone calls I thought. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): I mean, it really does. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): It’s just getting from here. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sheriff’s. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): So many years? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But it just doesn’t, like. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): It’s a real nail. SFV Room 200B: Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We have 47 on Zoom, what’s up? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): with that, Welcome to the Zoom call. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): usually have 41. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Oops. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I see a couple of faces that I’ve never seen before. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I was unaware. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): But that’s fine, you can do that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, excellent. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Austin Instrument, on 460 to anybody? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): economic duress case. Anybody? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Does anybody want to save? SFV Room 200B: December. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Betsy. SFV Room 200B: Excuse me. Sevada Safarian: I could do this one, Professor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Your name? Sevada Safarian: Savada? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Savannah, you just saved, Massey… Oyaka. Sevada Safarian: Yeah, sure. SFV Room 200B: Thank you. Go ahead. Sevada Safarian: The Laurel Corporation got a contract from the Navy to make radar sets and subcontracted some of the parts to Austin Instruments. Sevada Safarian: When Laurel got a second contract, Austin demanded to make all the parts and threatened to stop delivering parts for the first contract unless Laurel agreed to pay more. Laurel couldn’t find another supplier in time to avoid breaking its Navy contract, so it agreed to Austin’s price increases. Sevada Safarian: After fulfilling its Navy contracts, Laurel refused to pay the increased prices, claiming Austin had forced it into the agreement. Austin sued Laurel for the prices, for the price increase. The issue is, the question is whether a contract can be canceled if one party was forced to agree to Sevada Safarian: to it because of a wrongful threat that didn’t let them make, basically, a free choice. And the court said, yes, the contract can be canceled if one party was forced to agree to it because of a wrongful threat. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): That’s it? Sevada Safarian: I mean, I have more… this can be shown if one party threatened to break the contract, unless the other party agreed to something more. The threatened party must also show they couldn’t get the goods from another supplier, and that the usual ways to deal with a broken contract wouldn’t work. Sevada Safarian: And there was also a dissent. The dissenting judge thinks Austin didn’t threaten Laurel, but just asked to renegotiate the contract because Laurel didn’t provide some items. Sevada Safarian: The judge also thinks there were other suppliers available, and that Laurel only relied on suppliers that it had worked with before. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Thank you, excellent. That’s what I was looking for. Other suppliers available. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): What about. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the pre-existing duty rule. SFV Room 200B: Does that play a part here in this case? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Would you bring it up? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Honestly. Frantz b: Yes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What? Frantz b: Because, they signed a contract, and the other party had a duty to, Frantz b: To, play the contract out, like, their end of the bargain. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, I would bring it up. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In other words, even if you don’t see it as an issue in a context like this, you should always be thinking pre-existing duty. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Once you see a contract, and somebody’s trying, in some way or a fashion. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): to part from the terms of the contract, you’ve got to talk about pre-existing duty rule, right? You can sue for that, you don’t have to sue for economic duress, you can sue for pre-existing duty rule and say, hey, wait a second, I already paid this guy, he was supposed to do A, B, and C anyway. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, asking for more, unconscionable. SFV Room 200B: Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, so, great job, thank you. On page 464, second full paragraph, the court says the applicable law is clear. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): A contract is voidable on the grounds of duress when it is established that the party making the claim was forced to agree to it by means of wrongful threat precluding exercise of free will. Okay? That is a beautiful, beautiful definition. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The court says the existence of economic duress or business compulsion is demonstrated by proof that immediate possession of needful goods is threatened. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Then, more important than that, the court says, however, a mere threat by one party to breach the contract by not delivering the required items Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Through wrongful, though wrongful does not in itself constitute economic duress. Think about this. It’s literally giving you a roadmap that you should use in your final Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And at the bar. So a mere threat that I’m not going to deliver the goods is not economic duress. What is? So the court goes on to say it must also appear Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): that the threatened party could not obtain the goods from another source of supply, and that the ordinary remedy of an action for breach of contract would not be adequate. What does that mean? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you get your stuff from another source, then you sue, which is your known remedy, right? You sue the party that you have contract with for including pre-existing duty rule, etc, breach of contract, so on and so forth, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So… Not just that they threatened, but they literally… you could have… you did not have any other means. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Any other source. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): physical duress, you could… you didn’t have any other choice. We’re gonna… we’re gonna kill your child, God forbid, you know, if you don’t sign. So, in other words, there is… there is a real threat. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): and you had no other alternative. That’s all you need to say. No other alternative, right? Or no other reasonable alternative, I think, would be a better statement, frankly. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you don’t have to go to, as I said, go to China and get your supplies if you were getting it from, you know, a supplier in California. You don’t have to go that far. But if you can literally get another supplier within a reasonable Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): distance, expense, etc. to produce the same goods to you, then you may not have economic duress, even though you may have a bridge contract, regardless. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. And then, of course, on page 465, the court talks about burden. We already talked about it. Bottom of 465, the court says. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Lorel, as indicated above, also had the burden of demonstrating that he could not obtain. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): the parts elsewhere. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): within a reasonable time, and there can be no doubt that it met its burden. So, in other words, the court says, if you raise the defense of economic or physical duress, then you have the burden to prove it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? All the elements. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s see… yes, sir. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Is there such thing as emotional dress? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): or does that fall under physical… It would be under physical duress, I would say. We don’t have… although you can sue for something else, that are emotional related, but usually those are total claims, not contract claims. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): I have a question. So, for example, if two parties sign a, contract, and they… then, let’s say, like, one party, something happens to them. Like, they get sick, they get bankrupt, or something like that. So, based on the definitions and discussions that we… that we had, I guess that wouldn’t be duress, right? No. Then what would be the remedy? Like, what can the other party do? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Well, it depends, you know, to the. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Did the party drop dead? You know, did the party get sick? Did the party file bankruptcy? I mean, it’s not easy to answer. You know, usually when you file bankruptcy, if you successfully file bankruptcy, your other parties. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): screwed. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): And what about, like, sickness or stuff like that? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You would have to find out if there is a breach, you know, if the breach is not intentional. Could it be… yeah, if you have a duty and you don’t perform, regardless of what happens, you contract with a contractor to build a house for you, and he leaves in the middle of building the house, and God forbid, he has cancer. That is not a defense. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): So the law doesn’t, like, see anything? Nope. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): No, that’s why you carry insurance, to protect you, in case something happens. What happens if you hire me as a lawyer, and I get sick, and I don’t show up to court, and you go to jail? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Do I have a defense, Your Honor? I was sick. Sorry. She got 20 years. Oops. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): It’s worse than that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It doesn’t work like that. Now, does it mean they’re going to disbar me? Probably not, right? Because it wasn’t my fault that I got, say, or got cancer, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It wasn’t my fault, but if I was on… if I was on vacation, and I got drunk, and, you know, I forgot where I am, and I missed the plane, and didn’t show up at your sentencing, and the federal judge sentenced you to 20 years, oh, I’m for sure this part. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Bye-bye, ball guard. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So there’s… it’s different. And of course, you get to sue me. Yeah. In that case, can we say that the client had an opportunity to hire a different attorney? Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Could… could the. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): client hired a different. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): attorney, I… well, maybe… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Maybe. I would say that if it’s the day of the sentencing, like I just exam… gave as an example, there’s no way you can hire another lawyer that would go through a federal sentencing. It’s… it takes months to get ready for it. Sometimes. So, but, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the judge is immune, so the person that should be sued is the judge, who forced you to go through sentencing without your lawyer present, right? It never happens. I mean, almost never. If the court sees that your lawyer’s not present, they’re not gonna… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They’re not going to proceed. They just will not do that. It doesn’t work like that. But I just used it as an example, because it does happen sometimes that the lawyer doesn’t show up, not in sentencing, but in other contexts, and the court proceeds. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, they don’t… they don’t care. You’re not there? Okay, so bad. Too bad. Yeah, like, for example, if there’s… if you’re hired, you don’t show up for the arraignment, right? You miss calendar. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): and there’s a warrant for the client’s arrest. It has happened to me. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I think once or twice, that I literally either miscalendared or something happened, and I found out the next day that, oops, there’s a warrant for my client. And I call the client, me in court tomorrow, 8 a.m. sharp. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I just basically tell the court what happened, and the judge Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): washes the warrant, but it’s… bad things can happen. You need to quickly rectify the problem, and be honest with your client, always. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Two questions about economic. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): the rest. So, there has to be an existing contractual relationship. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yes, usually, yes. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Usually, yeah, most of the time. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): And the two elements were that there was a wrongful act by. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): the party. That you were susceptible? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sometimes, yeah, but usually there’s a wrongful act. Wrongful act. Yeah. And then, as a result of that wrongful act, the other party had no reasonable. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): alternatives, but, fine. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Correct. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Oh, it takes susceptibility out of… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Economic tools. That’s undo itself, yes. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): So… Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Thank you. So… Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Yes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, yeah, almost always you will find there is an, there is an existing contractual Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Dealings between the parties. And one, for whatever reason, tries to modify the terms of the contract, but in an unfair manner. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Obviously, as we talked about before break. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The parties can enter into a modified contract that is otherwise enforceable if they are dealing with each other fairly and equitably, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Not to say, I’m not going to supply unless you pay me more money. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It doesn’t work that way. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): All right, but to get this, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let me just see if I want to read. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Nope. Okay, so we’re gonna do problem one on page 467. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): To make sure this is… this is hammered home. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): L’Oreal entered into a number of negotiated fixed-price contracts for the Navy for the manufacture of electronic equipment. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the contract price prices were based on the Navy’s calculation of production cost. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The Navy, however, did not adequately calculate rental value of Laurel’s factory. Despite Laurel’s, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): protestation on this point, Laurel entered into the contract. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Nolaro is now in court seeking additional compensation by alleging duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It argues that since it dealt almost exclusively with the government, it would have committed financial suicide by refusing to enter into the contracts at the Navy’s price. What result? Frantz b: There’s no duress there. Frantz b: Because they didn’t have to… SFV Room 200B: the. Frantz b: government didn’t force them to do anything. Even though it would be financial suicide to them, they were never forced physically or, economically to enter into the contract. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s exactly what the court said. The court said, judgment for the defendant. The court ruled that the duress, although it did exist, it was not of any fault of Navy. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Not of any fault of the government. You could have just said, no, thank you. You know, just because you want the contract doesn’t mean… this is a 1969 case called CAPS, C-A-P-P-S versus Georgia PAC. Speaker 11 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? Yes. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): Another element that failed here is that he. Speaker 11 (SFV Room 200B): did have reasonable arteries? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That the party that they sued was not the party that asserted the… that caused the economic duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It was their own circumstances. SFV Room 200B: It was in the Navy. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Navy says, here’s my calculation. You don’t want it? Screw you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s it. You can’t say, oh, I only signed because otherwise it would be financial suicide. Pay me. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The court says, no, not so fast. They didn’t change anything. They didn’t enter into an existing contract and then change the price. There was no wrongful… Yeah, there was no wrongful… on the part of the defendant, which was the Navy. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So the court says no. Which is what I told you, if you remember before break, I said, that’s how we test economic duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We throw it out there, and as one of the, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): MBEs, you checkmark, but you don’t realize that the party that is putting the duress Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): On the party is not the defendant. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That is not economic duress. It may come because your business is going down the shit. Maybe your neighbor is doing that. Maybe your husband is putting economic duress on you. That is not the fault of the defendant. So you don’t get to sue the defendant for that. You need to show that the party that you’re suing is the party that Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s set in the duress, right? Economic or physical. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Problem two, Professor, what would you. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): the Navy… Speaker 7 (SFV Room 200B): Like, what would it maybe have to do here for it to be economic direct? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Well, the Navy probably would, I would say if the Navy was already in a contractual relationship with, what is it, Laurel? And then they would say, you know, we want additional 500 units, it would literally cost more money, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I’m just off the top of my head. Let’s say that they exclusively dealt with the Navy, and Navy knew this. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? And they want to force them into the old price, even though they know that is not a reasonable price. They will lose money. And I think in that case, you could at least make the argument that this is economic duress, because the Navy knew Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): as they claimed, it would be economic suicide. The company will go on there. You’re the only client I have, and you’re forcing me into an old price when you know the cost is substantially higher, right? So, in that case, maybe the court might say economic duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And especially because then you’re not dealing with them fairly. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? So even if there’s a modification, it’s not a fair modification. SFV Room 200B: Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Plaintiff’s father had, made a will in which he threatened… he treated each of his three children, including plaintiff, equally. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Subsequently, plaintiff informed her father that she was pregnant and had no intention to marry. He told her that unless she had the pregnancy terminated, he would disinherit her. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): She refused, and within a few days, he changed the will. Shortly thereafter, he agreed that if she would terminate the pregnancy, he would execute a will that was at the same… as the same as the will that he had just revoked. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): She complied, but he died before carrying out his end of the bargain. In her action against the estate and her siblings, they raised the defense that she had been coerced into making the agreement. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): With the decedent, and therefore, it is void… avoidable for duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): How, viable is the defense? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This is a real case, yes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I would say… When she told the daughter that if you don’t, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Get rid of the baby, basically, terminate the pregnancy. Speaker 7 (SFV Room 200B): I’ll disinherit you. That was an offer, but since he died, death terminates the offer. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): So the duress won’t come into play. But she agreed before that, right? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Frantz b: Professor… Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): One sec. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): One more time? Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): I said, so, the plaintiff, the father, when… Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): she told the daughter that you have to terminate the pregnancy. I would count that as an offer to the daughter, but… Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): When the father, who’s the off-road, died. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): And we know that that terminates the offer of… when the offeror dies, so… Did she comply? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Though? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Dude, she did. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, she complied. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Then he died. Yes. He dropped it after she complied. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, what about now? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Well, specifically, we’re talking about duress. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Did you want to say something? Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): I would say that it is a duress. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Tell me why. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Well, because… Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): to know the why. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Yes, because… Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): He gave the condition that, this is my condition, if you want to get the inheritance, then you have to do this, and she complied. Speaker 13 (SFV Room 200B): And now she has the right to… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So did she put duress on him? Because that’s what they’re claiming, the siblings, right? The siblings are claiming that she’s the one that put duress on the father. No. Okay, that would fail, you would say? Yes. Sir? Speaker 7 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, now that you just said that, it kind of makes me up. I was gonna say there is no direct physical duress, because it wasn’t the only choice, like, she didn’t have to… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I see, but… Speaker 11 (SFV Room 200B): But it says, it says the defense is that she has been coerced. Speaker 11 (SFV Room 200B): by the… by the father, right? Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): I would say. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Well, she’s claiming that. Right? Yeah. Well, I mean, they’re claiming that, sorry. They are claiming… The siblings are claiming that she was coerced… So it’s not valid. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): Saying it’s voidable. Speaker 11 (SFV Room 200B): And I would say that that. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): Defense is not valid, because, Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): she had alternative, reasonable choices other than relying on the father’s will for making a living, or living. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In other words, you’re saying, if I hear you correctly, that, SFV Room 200B: She had no legal right. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): To the now-revoked will. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It was a kid. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): It’s a gift. That’s what you’re saying? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Very good. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Yes. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): I would say, based on the explanation that you gave, that the siblings are now saying this, the father was the one who gave the, the offer, basically, that if she terminates, it wasn’t that she was forcing the father, or the father was forcing her, so I would say definitely not. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So the father was coercing her. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): racing. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He was the one that was putting a lot of pressure on her. Exactly, she wasn’t doing that. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): I don’t want to throw down at the office. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You see, he says. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Like, my friend, who was in love with this girl that the parents did not approve when we were, like, in our 20s, the father said, if you get rid of her, I’ll give you a million dollars. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And he did. He paid… he gave him a million dollars. He got rid of her. And thank God he did, because he’s a drunk right now, and she’s married to the best guy. She’s so happy. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But he got a million dollars, I don’t know what the hell he did with it, but he’s a drunk. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): Nice. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Years later. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): approved it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): She probably would have saved his life. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, anyone. Frantz b: Professor Starr, could I ask a question? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Zoom. Yes, sir, please. Frantz b: Is this the same type of question like the one where the grandparent, tells his grandson, I’ll pay you if you stop smoking and drinking and cursing? Frantz b: So there, he’s… the grandson is giving up, like, a legal value. Not a legal value, but a legal right, something he’s entitled to do. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): close, except that I think she had no legal right to the will. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But he terminated it. It’s his will. It’s literally a gift, right? Inheritance is a gift. It’s not like you’re paying for it. Frantz b: Right. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, that’s the only distinction. Here, by the way. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The defense is, of course, totally inappropriate. First, it seems that the agreement is not voidable even by the daughter, except possibly on public policy grounds, not for duress, since she seems to lack any right to the father’s property, which is, I think, what you said. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? However, if the agreement were voidable by the daughter, the plaintiff, duress could not have been raised by the father in his lifetime, because he was the party exerting coercion, which is what I think you said and you said. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? So clearly, third parties deriving a benefit from it are not in a position to raise that defense. So, the court basically said, to hell with that defense, that is not a defense. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Professor. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): wouldn’t she be entitled to anything? Because, there was consideration, the following… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Firstly, oh, you mean as far as… She, she gets… Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): That’s exciting. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I would say, yeah, actually, that’s why the siblings lost with that defense. They lost this defense. They said duress. Why did they say duress? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They wanted to say the contract was never formed. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): they lost, so the contract was fourth. Now, I honestly, I don’t remember from the time that I read this case what she got, but I’m pretty sure she got something. In other words, it would not be in the. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): field. Speaker 11 (SFV Room 200B): So this was a unilateral contract. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): Or liuneral offer accepted by conduct? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, I mean, he said, if you do X, I’m gonna… I’m gonna give you the inheritance that I had given you before. She complied. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Probably cried and complained, but… Hey. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Money over child. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I know, huh? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s, it’s funny what money does to people. Okay, let’s see… Where are we? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Undue influence. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Fran… Francis… Adreanne Kumamoto: Friends! Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Versus Francois. Did I say that correctly? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Francois? Speaker 14 (SFV Room 200B): I’m not French. I’m not French. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Who cares? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Sounds a lot better than the crap that I said. Francois versus Francois. Suren Abrahamyan: Can I do this case, Professor? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Please. Suren Abrahamyan: Francois. Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s good. Suren Abrahamyan: By the way, this guy’s an idiot. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Have your name. Suren Abrahamyan: Surin. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Surin, please. Yes? Suren Abrahamyan: So, Victor Francois, plaintiff, Mary Jane, Francois, defendant, 1971. Suren Abrahamyan: At the time, he was, he owned a lot of property. He was a pretty wealthy guy, so what he did was, a couple of mistakes. He, Suren Abrahamyan: He put money for both of their names into a joint account, he bought an expensive house for both of their names. Suren Abrahamyan: Adopted her children, conveyed to her his entire interest in rental properties. Suren Abrahamyan: A substantial portfolio of his interest in family businesses, gave her power of attorney over his public stocks, and bought her a boat. Suren Abrahamyan: Then in 1974, Jane retained a divorce attorney, and without Victor’s knowledge. Suren Abrahamyan: They presented him with the property settlement and separation agreement. They pretty much pressured him to sign this agreement, to avoid divorce, which he did, against his attorney’s, advice. Suren Abrahamyan: which the attorney told him would be a financial suicide. So he signed the documents, and after a couple of years, she actually left him, and, she divorced him. So, the court had to, he sued, he sued, his ex-wife, and, and he won, and she appealed. Suren Abrahamyan: And the issue was whether, if… Suren Abrahamyan: The document was induced by one person where there is, Suren Abrahamyan: where the two parties in a relationship, have balance of power is inequal, then, in that situation, the court ruled for him, saying that… the court actually affirmed the ruling, saying that under influence exists where a relationship of trust between two parties Suren Abrahamyan: results in an unequal balance of power between them, and a more powerful party uses his or her dominance and influence to persuade the weaker party to act against his or her interests. In this case, the weaker party was, Mr. Victor. So, yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, I think I want to call this case Salopek. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In French, it means bitch. Suren Abrahamyan: We got screwed pretty bad in the beginning. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): So, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Think about this case. Talk about duress, talk about undue influence, talk about everything else under the sun. Jesus Christ, it’s… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He didn’t commit suicide, that’s good. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, it sounds to me like some of these cases that I’ve done where one of the parties just planned a whole thing from day one, right? I think she planned everything. Look at the… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): There’s no re… there’s a reason why you see all these years, 1974, etc, etc, because the court is trying to say, this was an orchestrated event. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): This was all planned. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Just like the 43-year-old and the 72-year-old when I represented the guy. She planned the whole thing, everything, from day one, from the marriage part. She played hard to get for more than a year. He begged, paid, bought. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You name it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s funny. Level of commitment. She would not go to a restaurant in all parts of town. It was only specific parts of town. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): That she would. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Several sushi places, mostly in Beverly Hills, this, that, whatever. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Kidding. But when the guide was for. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): He’s 30 years younger than Professor, doesn’t he deserve that? Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): Wanna go white? Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Why would you hear so fair. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): 30 years younger. Why don’t we talk. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Oh, God. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He deserved to lose all of his assets. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): to that extent, but, like, when the guy’s doing… the guy wasn’t, like, a nice person, too, to me as well, going for 30 years younger. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): with somebody much younger? Yeah, you can. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Leonardo DiCaprio, the second they turn 22, he’s… they’re gone. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): Put all the blame on her, why not? I hear what you’re saying, but… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But I hear what you’re saying. No, I hear what you’re saying. I think there’s a difference between Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): an idiot, and a thief, right? He was stupid, absolutely. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): either falling in love with her, or liking her. It’s ego, I would call it. Ego. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But you can’t commit a crime because somebody has ego, you know? I tell you, my experience has been with these elderly individuals that I’ve represented. Believe it or not, it’s not ego, it’s, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): it’s end-of-life crisis. Seriously. They just, for some reason, they think. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): They’re no longer relevant. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Maybe it’s ego, I don’t know. We’ll go with Kenya. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): You should have just bought a GT. That’s what you wanted. Speaker 16 (SFV Room 200B): GT3. Relevant at Beverly Hills? Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, and she doesn’t talk background. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I like it. Sorry. Speaker 16 (SFV Room 200B): And honey, she roared. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): That’s what you want to hear. That’s right, that’s very good. No problem, that’s good. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Get that up? Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): You wouldn’t get that? I would get that over anything. See? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): That’s why we understand each other. Yup. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Surin, you did a great job. I don’t have to say too much, but here, on page 472, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The court says… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The degree of persuasion that is necessary to constitute undrue influence varies from case to case. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): First thing we have to know is not every case is Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the same, right? So it’s fact-based. The proper inquiry is not just whether the persuasion induced the transaction, but whether the result was reduced. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): of the will of the victim by… by the person exerting undue influence. Restatement of contracts 497. So if I’m writing notes, if I’m creating a, hopefully you are all creating, your own, you know. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): black letter law outline for the bar, I would include that in there. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Honestly. Or a language similar to this. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That… because that’s what you want to know, which is, I think, what you were commenting about. It’s not just… it’s… it’s… you have to find the person to be vulnerable. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And the person had obviously had… in the position of… was in the position of influence, right? She not only had the opportunity, but she had the what? SFV Room 200B: Indeed. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Look at my definition. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Disposition. Yeah, the disposition, very good. And she definitely milked it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So restatement section of contract, restatement of contract section 497 should give you… and then the degree of evidence that is required, which, by the way, you don’t learn… you don’t need to know in this class. This is for evidence class, right? The fairness of the agreement must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. Who knows what clear and convincing evidence is? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Does anybody know what it is? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What’s the, what’s the… Frantz b: You cannot, argue. It’s inarguable. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Isn’t it just the level of. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): somebody, what is usually the level of evidence that you need to show in a civil court? Suren Abrahamyan: convincing, and then it’s beyond reasonable doubt. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): preponderance of the evidence usually means about 51%. Okay, you just basically tip the scale. More likely than not. Right, very good. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But when you’re talking about clear and convincing evidence, and when I sit as a judge pro tem again. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I gotta remind myself of this stuff before I take the bench, right? Depending on the type of case, it may be that they have to show clear and convincing evidence. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Like, when I’m sitting, as a judge, hearing restraining orders. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s not 51%. It’s, like, 75% or more, which is clear and convincing evidence. Not beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s, like, 99.999%. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? It’s, like, almost 100%. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I would say. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I’m making this stuff up, but I’m telling you, if you ask any lawyer, they’ll tell you the same thing. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Clear and convincing is, like, 75% or more, right? So either you convince me, for sure, or I’m not going to give you a restraining order. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Some courts just throw restraining orders out there. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I swear to God, I had an airport police officer call me, I don’t know if I discussed it with you guys. No. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Recently. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): to… within the last two weeks. The wife called. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And then she put… she put the husband on the… on the phone because he was about to die. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): As she put it. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I said, what happened? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): neighbor got a restraining order against the husband. The husband is an airport police officer. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): neighbor is an asshole that is selling drugs out of his home. They have multiple videos, and harassing the kids, whatever. The father, the father finally had it, and basically told the, you know, the neighbor, stop it, you know, this is ridiculous, whatever. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They failed to tell the court that the guy’s a police officer. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): So what happens? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Airport police immediately said, turn in your gun. Oh my god. I swear to God, that day, turn in your gun, because there’s a restraining order against you. In fact, turn in all of your other guns to a gun dealer, or bring it to the station right now. You’re off duty. Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I swear to God, I had never… in 27 years, I had never heard that before. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It happened to me, as I told you, I’m sure I shared with you when somebody got a restraining order against me, I called LAPD, I said, do I have to turn over all my guns? And she said, no, are you crazy? Just show up in court, you know, we’re not gonna come take your guns. But this poor, poor police officer, Airport TD, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Had to turn over his gun, and the wife said he’s almost suicidal. I said, please don’t tell that to me. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): anybody else? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He’s gonna lose his job. Don’t say suicidal. Don’t say that. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So I hooked him up immediately with a therapist, and I said, I will take care of this for you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I did. But it’s… so… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Was there clear and convincing evidence in that case? I think not. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): Do you think if they told the court that he’s a police officer? Oh, for sure the court would. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): not grant that restraining order, the court would have granted a modified type of restraining order. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): that you can get… which is what happened. I went back to court immediately, and I said, Your Honor, modify the restraining order until the hearing so that he can do his job. He’s a cop. She said, oh, they never said that. I said, on purpose they didn’t say it, because his cop car with his canine, he took his canine too. He took his canine from. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I did. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which was… which is what messed him up, more than everything else. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The canine with a cop car shows up every afternoon. You didn’t know he’s a cop? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I literally said that. I said, Your Honor, take a look at the photos. This is the driveway. SFV Room 200B: This a-hole is a liar. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And the judge modified the order immediately, restoring his gun rights, so that he can go… unfortunately, the department would not let him back in, and they said you have to wait for the hearing to be over. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): And why did he put a restraining order on the cop again? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): claim that he threatened his life and whatever. They’re just a bunch of drug addicts, you know, according to this neighbor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We’ll find out when we get to the full hearing. But that’s clear and convincing evidence, right? 75% at least. So when people show up, I don’t just hand out restraining orders. I ask questions. Ask a lot of questions. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): How do you know this guy? You know, how else do you know this guy? What does he do, or she do, does for a living? I ask all of those questions before I just turn over and, for convenience, give out restraining orders. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which I think, in this case, the judge also learned a hard lesson. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But maybe you should ask some questions before you just say yes. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Karia Salazar: Question. Speaker 15 (SFV Room 200B): That’s true. Karia Salazar: about that. Are there any consequences for the person who, if they lie, or, like, it seems, like, very easy to just, like. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’ll give you a sh… Karia Salazar: Come on. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Short answer, because this is a contract course, and we have two more sessions to go. The short answer usually is unfortunately no. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Because you have something called litigation privilege. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s why I can stand in court and say, Your Honor, this defendant is a whore. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): And she can’t sue. Or he, by the way. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): they can’t sue me, because I have litigation privilege. They’re not, of course, I’m just making. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): his stuff up. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They can’t touch me. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Unfortunately. But, having said that, I gotta tell you this. If you lie in court, that’s a different thing. So if you lie in court, you could be held in contempt. They can prosecute you for lying. It’s perjury to lie in court. It’s a felony. Does that happen? Never. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’ve never seen that happen in 27 years. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Never. Not once have I seen that happen. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It just literally goes on the record and says, you lied, But nothing ever happens. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Most judges don’t say lie, by the way, they say, you were not persuasive, or I didn’t believe you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): another word… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): For… you lied. You’re bullshitting me. You’re bullshitting me. But the answer is usually they don’t do anything about it. Nothing. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): This is unfortunate. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? All right. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Mentor this mission home of Texas, aka. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): We’ll see. Adreanne Kumamoto: Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Eddie, may I please have your name? Adreanne Kumamoto: Adrian? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Oh, okay, please, proceed. Adreanne Kumamoto: On Zoom. Adrian, okay. Adreanne Kumamoto: I’ll start with the facts. So, Mission Home versus NAB. Adreanne Kumamoto: 1970 Texas. In Met Mission Home vs. NAB, the plaintiff, an unwed mother challenged the validity of documents she signed Adreanne Kumamoto: that surrendered custody of her child to the Methodist Mission Home for Adoption. Adreanne Kumamoto: These documents were alleged to have been signed under undue influence by the home’s agents, specifically Reverend Dawn Lily Jihadel, Ms. Sharon Burrows, and Ms. Joanne Burns. Adreanne Kumamoto: The home, operated by the United Methodist Church, provided care and counseling for unwed mothers with a policy encouraging mothers to release their children for adoption. Adreanne Kumamoto: Plaintiff resided at the home for over 15 weeks and initially intended to give up her child, as noted in her application for admission. However. Adreanne Kumamoto: After the birth of her son, she expressed a desire to keep him, which led to a series of intensive counseling sessions by Ms. Burns. Adreanne Kumamoto: The plaintiff claimed these sessions were coercive, emphasizing negative consequences if she kept her child, leading to emotional distress and her eventual consent to adoption. Adreanne Kumamoto: The trial court ruled in favor for the plaintiff, voiding the adoption consent on the grounds of undue influence. Based on the injury’s findings, the myth that his mission home appealed the decision, arguing insufficient evidence of undue influence. Adreanne Kumamoto: What is the issue? The main issue was whether the execution of the adoption consent documents by the plaintiff was a result of undue influence exerted by the Methodist Mission Home’s agents, thereby rendering the consent revocable. Adreanne Kumamoto: The holding Texas Court of Civil Appeals held that there were sufficient evidence to support the jury’s findings that undue influence was exerted in the plaintiffs justifying the revocation of her consent to the adoption. Adreanne Kumamoto: The reasoning? The Texas Court of Civil Appeals reasoned that the evidence presented supported the jury’s conclusion that the plaintiff faced excessive persuasion from the home’s counselors, which undermined her free will. Adreanne Kumamoto: The court noted that the plaintiff, a vulnerable, unwed mother, was subjected to a concentrated effort to convince her to give up her child. Adreanne Kumamoto: Characterized by statements accusing of her selfishness and questioning her right to keep her child. Adreanne Kumamoto: Ms. Byrne’s counseling sessions focused solely on the negative aspects of keeping the child, without providing a balanced view. The court also highlighted that the home’s policy was to encourage adoption, and the counselor’s action aligned with this policy. Adreanne Kumamoto: The court found the plaintiff’s emotional distress credible, considering the pressure exerted on her during a critical and vulnerable period following the childbirth. The court concluded that this influence was undue because it went beyond mere persuasion. Adreanne Kumamoto: Effectively subverting the plaintiff’s free agency to express her own will in the decision-making process. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Very good. Thank you very much. So… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): just a couple of things. I don’t want to go too much into this, because if you haven’t got it already, you probably won’t get it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Indy. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But, look at this. The court on 475 says, it is true that, exerted influence cannot be branded as undue Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Merely because it is persuasive and effective. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And I want to make sure that we all get that. If somebody’s persuasive and, you know, very, very effective, and Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you know, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): argumentative, to the point that the other party gets tired, for example, and agrees to something. That is not undue influence. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): points. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): you literally have to subvert their, free will. Look at what the court said. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): what comes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): constitutes undue influence depends on the particular facts and circumstances of each case, viewed in light of applicable principles of law. It is said that a finding of undue influence is justified only where the actor’s free agency and will has been destroyed. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): See what I mean? Of not… of free will. And I… in this case, I can’t… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I… I can… I keep thinking about that husband and wife case. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Because that was also a relationship of confidentiality and Confidence and trust. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? And I think somebody who’s a church member probably has the same relationship, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I don’t think that… well, it’s obvious that the court did not go there. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But the court just basically went undue influence. But I would… I would say that there was, in fact, a relationship of confidence and trust Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which… Probably had something to do with the court’s decision. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It wasn’t like, oh, somebody else, you know, talked her into it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But… If you’re a church member and you’re a person of faith. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You act differently, right? With, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the church’s teachings than somebody who has faith, no faith, right? Doesn’t care. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Does that make sense? So, I think the court will probably look into the relationship as well. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I would. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Misrepresentation, non-disclosure, and warranty on page 477. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Is this also a French name? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yes. Cuisine… cuisine release? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): What is it? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): No. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): now. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I can do that one. How’s going to leave? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): I’m sorry, you’re a good act. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): Hasanath? Hasenau versus Walker, actually. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): He says that’s what it is. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): It’s close enough. The Democratic Party is… Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): That’s the easy part. Thank you, please. I was part of Alaska 1980, checkpoint as an anniversaries. Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): Devon Walker, defendant. Defendant and his wife. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): purchased land in 1975 and attempted to sell it in 1976. The multiple listing agreements stated that the land had 580 feet of highway frontage and possessed over $1 million in gravel on the crop. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): The multiple listing agreement expired, and new agreement was signed. New listing had same frontage square footage, but gravel was set at 80,000 cubic yards, and a new asking price was set. After an appraisal was conducted, the plaintiff offered $360,000, and as he… Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): Needed it for a gravel extraction for business purposes. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): He finally agreed to pay $385,000 for the property. Shortly after closing, plaintiffs started gravel removing. After investing $12,000 in gravel scale. They quickly found out that the frontage was actually 450 square feet and only had 6,000 yards of gravel. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): Plaintiff stopped paying for the property in 1977 after paying, $99,000 on the property. Plaintiff filed a suit for rescission and restitution. At a bench trial, plaintiff and his partners were denied rescission and restitution, and the court ruled for judge… for the tenant, claiming plaintiff did not rely on any misrep… Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): representations. Issue was whether the plaintiff is entitled to a rescission and restitution for the sale of land that was purchased under false statement made by the defendant. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): Forefound, the plaintiff is entitled to rescission of the contract because misrepresentation made the defendant considering the plaintiff relied on the misrepresentation, and the misrepresentations are material to the contract for the restatement of contracts. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): Restatement second of contract misrepresentation may be grounded for avoiding a contract if it is either fraudulent or material. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): Even though the gravel on the property and the frontage was not on… was not a material element on the negotiation that they had in 1977 purchase agreement, plaintiff relied on the misinformation of the defendants for gravel extraction as a business profit. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): Since the business profit was at issue, and because the plaintiff was interested in the property for gravel extraction only, the misrepresentation was considered a material. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): As a matter of law, the statement regarding frontage and gravel content or material as defendant considered it a selling point, and lying about the frontage and gravel was purposely falsified to sell. Therefore, the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before the purchase was made does not apply, so the court did reverse the… Very, very good. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): Excellent, thank you. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Page 480. I think everything you need to know is right there. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The court says numerous cases and the restatement provides Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): that an innocent mistake… I’m sorry, innocent misrepresentation may be the basis for rescinding the contract. There’s no question as the trial judge’s findings of fact state that the statement made by Walker and his real estate agent in a multiple listing were false. Three questions, although, must be resolved. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): However, to determine whether C is entitled to rescission. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): and restitution, right? First, it must be determined whether C, in fact, relied on the statement. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Number two, that the statements were material, and number three, whether that reliance was justified. In other words, objectively. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): green light. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? And those are the things that the court says you need to show. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): in order to say, misrepresentation is a cause for rescission. Make sense? So not just that it was a false statement, but yet you relied on the false statement. The false statement was of a material nature, and you were justified in relying on that statement. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, please. Who’s a relaxed. Speaker 11 (SFV Room 200B): Justified of this case number. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You want to answer it? What was it? What’s the question? Why was the reliance justified in this case? Can anybody answer that question? Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): purpose of earning money. I’m sorry? The purchase was made for him to earn money out of the gravel. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): The only purpose of his purchase. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I would respond by saying, in any case, if I want to find out if the reliance was justified, I would say. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In a case like this, would you rely on the MLS? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Multiple listing service, if you read something. If it says the square footage of the home is 4,000, there’s 5 bedrooms, and there’s a pool, and there’s a sauna. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Would you rely on that statement? I would. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If the dealer says, this car will do 0-60 in 4 seconds. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Can I rely on it? I think I should. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): anymore. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Right? No, I shouldn’. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, well, I want you as my lawyer to… yeah, I want you as my lawyer, but I guess the dealer not. But if, let’s say, the manufacturer’s, specs are that it’s 4 seconds. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They know… they always lie with, with, gas miners, right? Total bullshit. Yes, lie with everything. My car says, I don’t know, 22. Good luck getting… Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): 14. Speaker 16 (SFV Room 200B): They lie with the horsepower, too. With the horsepower, too, they always like that, too? Wonderful. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): driven course. Speaker 16 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, you have some dyno in to get the. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, they… yeah. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): I heard Porsche in particular. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I’m sorry? Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): It’s like I heard Porsche in Porsche. I said Porsche in particular. Porsche in particular? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, I don’t know. I’m just kidding, because I know you have the Porsches. I understand, I understand. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): You know I’m a Porsche lover, but yeah. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): And then you sue them later. Yeah, the. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): No, I don’t… I don’t think Porsche misrepresents… Most of the stuff regarding Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): performance of the car. I think they actually underestimate, so that you can get surprised. Honestly. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Just from somebody who’s been driving it for so many years. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But, so I guess the answer to the question is, who’s the speaker? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Who’s making the statement? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Should I justifiably rely on that statement? The agent lied, the court says. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s a big deal. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Agents lying about a transaction, that’s a big deal. They haven’t. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): duty of care. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They are responsible to provide accurate information. That’s why in California… by the way, it’s funny, because in this case, if you think about it, either party had a lawyer. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They didn’t have a surveyor. I mean, what the hell? Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): than on the property. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They… it’s Alaska. If it was in California, I bet you there were, like, 50 lawyers. No, I’m jokes. But there were at least one lawyer… at least one lawyer and surveyor on either side. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They wouldn’t do this. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So that’s another thing. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which leads to disaster like this. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But yeah, I would say, if I want to say justifiable reliance, I want to know who’s the speaker. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): When I told you I sued National University, you guys remember that? Yes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The issue… the central issue was that… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They claim it is somebody’s judgment. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That the clients should not have, could not have relied on the statement of this guy Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Who said, if you finish this class, that class, and this class, you will get 2 degrees. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Two masters at the same time. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Which we knew was complete bullshit. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And… This is literally not in the papers, because they brought that up in court Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): army of lawyers on that side, I’m alone on this side, and I never forget it. I just… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): For a second, I thought. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What an argument. So when it was my turn to argue, I said, Your Honor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s a very, very nice statement, except… the guy… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Happens to be in the admissions office, in a suit and tie. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In an office, making this representation to the students. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): he was not the janitor in the janitor’s clothing, with rubber gloves, with a trash can next to him. That we would say they could not have justifiably relied on his statement, because they knew he’s a nobody. I mean, he’s everybody. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): But he’s a janitor. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): You get my point? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Of course, they could rely on somebody’s statement that was sitting in… literally, that’s what the court said in his final ruling. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That they relied, they justifiably relied, because they relied on the speaker. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): who was in… you know, he claimed to be… they claimed that he was not the dean, therefore he could not have made such a statement. Bullshit! Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): It’s what the court’s saying. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right after that summary judgment is when we had that Pediation, and we settle. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They knew that Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): they have lost all their cards. Nobody’s gonna believe their BS. When there’s an expert, even. Speaker 3 (SFV Room 200B): In their expert opinion, even if it’s not a statement of fact, could also be a fraudulent misrepresentation. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): Of course. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Absolutely, yes. That could be even worse, because expert heightened beauty of care, and, you know, you definitely rely on the expert, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Bad example, but the lawyer for Porsche asked me… asked my lawyer, why did he continue driving the car? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And just what you said. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): My lawyer said, well, my client took a video while driving the car, sent it to the service advisor, and said, look, there’s a strange sound coming from the engine. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): What should I do? Service advisor texted me, literally saying, don’t worry, it’s from the air conditioning, you’re safe, it’s all good. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Turn off the air conditioning, turn it back on. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): The next day, the engine blew. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s what happened to me. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): And I said. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And my lawyer said, shouldn’t he… shouldn’t he rely on the statement of the service advisor? I mean, he sent him a videotape. SFV Room 200B: He should have said, stop driving the damn car! Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I could have been killed. I mean, literally, that’s what the CHP said. He said, you could have been killed the way your car stopped in the middle of the road. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): On the 10 freeway. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But, you know, I’m not a Sue-happy guy, I don’t care. And I like my service advisor a lot. I just thought he was… he made a mistake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But could I have justifiably relied on his statement? Absolutely! Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If he was a salesperson. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I think most people would say, no, you couldn’t have. Especially because you’re a lawyer, you’re not an idiot. Why don’t you rely on a salesperson? But as a service advisor. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Who am I supposed to text? The mechanic is in there. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Get it? So, who’s the speaker? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s what I would think. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Should I rely on that statement? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, I hope I answered your question. Yes, thank you. Thank you, sir. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I was gonna say vodka, but it’s not vodka. It’s bokehes. This is not French. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Versus Arthur Murray, on… SFV Room 200B: Page 485. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This is the dance lesson piece. This is… this is always tested, believe it or not. And it always comes up, and I don’t know why, but it always comes up. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Perhaps it’s an example of. SFV Room 200B: Buck. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’m not gonna say. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Anybody wants to brief this case for us? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Please. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Somebody on Zoom, please. Speaker 17 (SFV Room 200B): That’s true, there’s no one there. You can’t find anyone. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I can find a lot of people, I just don’t want to be one of those professors that points to people. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, for example, Mr. Rosavi is smiling, I was going to say Ms. Rosavi, but let’s go with Mr. Sheck. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Could you do this for us, sir? Daniel Sheck: Yes, sir? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Thank you. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Please. Daniel Sheck: Audrey Volks was convinced by J.P. Davenport, owner of dance school, to buy a month of dance lessons. Over the next 18 months, she bought 14 more courses, spending over $31,000. Daniel Sheck: Both sued Davenport and his school, saying they tricked her into buying more lessons by lying about how good she was at dancing. Daniel Sheck: Davenport said that they were just giving her their opinion, which is allowed. The trial court dismissed Wolk’s case. Daniel Sheck: She ended up appealing. Daniel Sheck: The issue is… the question is whether someone’s opinion can be considered a lie if they know more about the truth to false… to falsify of what they are saying. Daniel Sheck: The court says, yes, an opinion can be a lie if the person Daniel Sheck: The opinion can be a lie if a person is giving it and knows more about the truth than falsely. Daniel Sheck: falsifies the statement. Usually lies are only actionable if they are about important of the facts, but the rule doesn’t apply if one party knows more than the other, or if there is a trickery involved. In this case, Davenport and his associates know more about Volk’s dancing ability than she did. Daniel Sheck: The opinions about her progress were treated as facts, and the trial court was wrong to dismiss her case. Volk’s appeal, Volk’s appeal is granted, and the trial court’s decision is reversed. SFV Room 200B: Very good. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): excess. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I think the court says on 488, we repeat the… that where parties are dealing on a contractual basis, at arm’s length, with no Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): inquiries… what is it? Inequities, or inherently unfair prac… Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): practices. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): employed, the court will, in general, leave the parties where they find themselves. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s also very, very important to keep in mind. In other words, the court says, unless you really screw somebody, the other party, if you had arm’s length negotiation, too bad, if you don’t like it. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I’m not gonna do anything about it. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And so, when you see prenuptials. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Or post-noctuals, but specifically prenuptials. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We always look to see if both parties were represented by separate lawyers. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): If there was arm and length negotiations, Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And if there was no undue influence. If that’s the case, then the court says, if you don’t like it, too bad. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You’re stuck with it, because you had representation, you had time to think about it, you know, if you were so happy about getting married, you should have thought about this too. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s an example of one of these cases. Okay, very good job, thank you. Mutual mistake. Bentley. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): on 488. Anyone? On Zoom. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I could not move fast, man. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, it’s yours. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Okay, so Karen Bentley, responded to a notice posted by Charles Levick, offering to sell an 1835 Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Bernardo violin. Slavic was not an expert or a dealer, showed Bentley a certificate from a violin appraiser estimating the violin to be genuine and valued at $50,000 to $20,000. After inspecting and playing the instrument, Bentley purchased it for $17,500, Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Paying $15,000 immediately, and agreeing to pay the remainder later. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): The bill of sale described the, the violin as a… Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): The model, and Bentley expressed her satisfaction in a later note when she paid the balance. About a year later, she learned that the violin might be inauthentic. An expert later confirmed that its value is only $2,000. Bentley sued for breach of contract and mutual mistake. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): The issue here was, is the buyer entitled to damages for overpaying when both parties honestly made a mistake believing that the item was authentic? And in this case, yes, because Bentley is entitled to damages under both breach of express warranty. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): and mutual mistake, because under the UCC Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): under UCC, an express warranty is created when the seller’s description of goods form part of the basis of the bargain by this Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Describing the violin as genuine, Slav warned its authenticity, and even though he acted in good faith. Because the violin was later proven false, that was the breach of the warranty. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Very good. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s look at 2-303. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I’m sorry. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): The team, yeah. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s take a look at it on page 973. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Express warranties by affirmation, promise, description, sample. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): 1. Express warranties by the seller are created as follows. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Any affirmation of fact or promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the goods and becomes part of the basis of the bargain creates an express warranty that the goods shall conform to the affirmation or promise. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Why did I. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Rita. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Because a lot of times, people come… not a lot of times, but when I do Lemon, for example, people come and say, I didn’t buy the car brand new. I bought the car used, but it was CPO, for example, right? Lemon law may or may not apply. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): But what do I do? Breach of express warrant. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): did you ask the dealer how is the brake on this car? He said, oh, it’s absolutely the best. It’s better than Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): X. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): An expression of opinion? No, because he said it’s better than this other car. That is no longer an opinion, because we can fact check. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, not only I sue for fraud, misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, I always would breach a warranty, and I just go on and on and on. And I always use this section, and I love this section. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, because that’s how you get money back. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Any affirmation of fact or promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the good and becomes part of the basis of the bargain. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Any description of the good, which is made part of the basis of the bargain, creates an express warranty that the good shall conform to the description. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): A sample or model which is made part of the basis of the bargain creates an express warranty that the whole of the goods shall conform to the sample or model. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This happens sometimes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): with, goods that they, that, . SFV Room 200B: suppliers. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): order, but they haven’t actually seen the final product. They’ve seen a sample, and they go, I love it. I want 500. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Right? And if it turns out that it’s not conforming to that sample, then that section applies, okay? It’s not usually tested, you’ll never see it. But subsection 1, you probably might see that, okay? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And, does anybody work in a car dealership? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Good. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Because… Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Good. Because you laugh. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): when I say I sue them for this reason or that reason, but you have no idea how much fraud they commit on a daily basis. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): They gotta send a damn car, or recently, a bike, and they, they just, they tell you anything you want to hear. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): A lot of times. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Unless when they realize that you are well-informed. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): then… then they just ease up a little bit. They try to make you fall in love with it, right, and bullshit you, right? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Cooking. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Let’s see… what decline? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Spice. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Mutual mistake, Nelson versus Rice on 494, and then I will let you go. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So please stay awake for 5 more minutes. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Anybody wants to do Nelson, please? SFV Room 200B: Open to anyone who is awake. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I see a lot of people going… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): I have to tell my daughter every morning, eat your eggs, otherwise you won’t have energy to go PE. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So I’m telling you all, eat your eggs, please. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Go ahead, guys. Anybody? Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): I’ll do it. It’s all yours. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Thank you. Edward from. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): and Kenneth Newman, the plaintiffs, the represent, the representatives of the state of Martha Nelson. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): the estate scheduled an estate sale after her death. An appraiser who did not appraise fine art was brought in to assess the value of the property. She told the representatives Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): That she would notify them of any fine art she saw so that they could hire an independent appraiser. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): She did not, report any fine art. At the sale, Carl Rice, the defendant, purchased two oil paintings for $60. He was not, knowledgeable… he was not a knowledgeable collector and assumed the paintings were not originals. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): Nevertheless, after comparing signatures on the works to a book of artists’ signatures, he submitted photos of the paintings to the auction house, Christie’s. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): which authenticated the works as genuine paintings by Martin Johnson Head. Christie’s, sold the paintings for rice on consignment. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): netting him $911,000. The state sued Rice to rescind or reform the sale of transaction on the grounds of mutual mistake and unconscionability. Rice moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. The state appealed. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): And the issue was, does a party to a contract bear the risk of mistake if he is aware at the time the contract is made that he has only limited knowledge with respect to the facts to which the mistake relates, but treats his limited knowledge as sufficient? SFV Room 200B: And, court’s holding was… Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): Mutual mistake regarding a basic assumption underlying a contract may entitle a party to rescind the contract? Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): But only if such party did not assume the risk of mistake. A party assumes the risk of mistake if it is consciously ignorant, that is, if it proceeds. Speaker 12 (SFV Room 200B): With the transaction, despite knowing that it lacks factual information relating to the mistaken issue. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Very, very good. So what happened to the bank? SFV Room 200B: Was it a bank that got screwed? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the auction. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Auction House? Yeah, auction house? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah. So, bottom line is what we were talking about earlier, assumption of the risk, remember? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And that’s… this is a prime example of assumption of the risk, that if you think your knowledge is superior, and you know, and you happen to make a mistake, and the other party did not know, nor did they, right. And then you’re stuck with that decision of yours, and of course, it’s going to be of no help. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): In other words, you can’t come and claim foul when nobody committed foul except you. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): by ignorance. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): That’s what that case is all about. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Okay? I won’t go through the following case. We’re going to do that on Saturday, and I hope… Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): We’re gonna do. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): another mistake, let’s see… I think we’re almost done. So, I may, I may, between now and Saturday, send one or two sample questions. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): 312? SFV Room 200B: Come on. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): us to, either write or outline. I may do that, okay? So that will be Saturday when we come, I think, when it starts Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So Saturday and Monday, you can expect to do at least 3 questions, maybe 4. SFV Room 200B: Alright, session. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Every single sentence. SFV Room 200B: Thank you, Professor. Thank you. Fatima Razavi: Professor. arthur mazloumian: Thank you. arthur mazloumian: Go ahead. Karia Salazar: I wanted to ask you something. Speaker 15 (SFV Room 200B): Before we… Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): If I can hear the noise. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): 25, 26, yeah, I don’t… Speaker 14 (SFV Room 200B): What’s your gloom, Marie? Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): No, because he says that every… Karia Salazar: I attended a different contracts class on November 3rd. Would I be able to get attendance? Speaker 15 (SFV Room 200B): Cell phone. My cell phone? Speaker 6 (SFV Room 200B): The sentences from the case. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Oh my god, I know she’s not till before a year. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, that’s what I was saying, I’m like, it’s behind the scenes. Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): I hit up Patty to see when registration opens up. Well, I thought they were going to send it today. Speaker 14 (SFV Room 200B): Is she the one who’s spreading the rumors? Speaker 4 (SFV Room 200B): 8 AM. She’s like… Speaker 16 (SFV Room 200B): That’s what I want, yes. Speaker 5 (SFV Room 200B): I swear to God, I was like, oh… You don’t need to do that for this school. Speaker 9 (SFV Room 200B): Thank you so much. Speaker 7 (SFV Room 200B): Are we gonna cover or warranty fit for a particular purpose? Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): I don’t think it’s going to be this semester. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah. Two more sessions? Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): We have two more sessions. Saturday and… Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Monday, you watch. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): the sooner. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): See you. See you on Saturday. Okay, buddy. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Much to my surprise, Steve walked in. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): To my class, and he said, thank you for writing the letter regarding parking. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): This is Professor Cade. Speaker 10 (SFV Room 200B): Hi, this is Caria Salza Maria. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Yes, I couldn’t hear you, that’s why I asked you to call me. Sorry. Speaker 8 (SFV Room 200B): Yeah, on November 3rd, I attended the Dean’s Contract Class. Speaker 18 (SFV Room 200B): I wanted to see if I could get attendance for that day. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You attended… well, you have to ask him. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So, yeah, if you attended his class, you gotta ask him if that’s in attendance. I have no power over… were you ever absent from my class? Speaker 18 (SFV Room 200B): I think once, one other time. Okay. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): So if you want to get credit, you have to ask him. I’m not sure if he will do it, but it doesn’t hurt to ask. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Why not? You never know. No, it’s… well, if it’s his class, I have, you know, I can’t… it’s totally inappropriate for me to… Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): Give you credit for his class. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): You know, but if he decides to do it, absolutely no problem. I’m cool with that. Okay? Okie dokie, you’re welcome. Okay. Bye-bye. Speaker 2 (SFV Room 200B): And said, thank you for raising that issue regarding parking. It’s a very serious problem.