Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Role and Functions of Law Law/421 September 24, 2014 David Klein Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker 1.) At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? BTT sent Chou an e-mail to confirm the terms of the verbal agreement. The email included the key terms of the distribution agreement, price, and other obligations of both parties. The e-mail was a valid contract of legal promises. 2.) What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms
Words: 383 - Pages: 2
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Ana Corral Law421 November 25, 2013 Michael John Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Big Time Toymaker (BTT) develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys in North America, Chou is the inventor of a new strategy game he calls Strat. BTT had an interest in distributing Strat and entered into an agreement with Chou, offering him $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. This agreement stipulated that no distribution
Words: 1172 - Pages: 5
Big Time Toymaker (BTT) is a toy company that sells products to the United States, Canada and Mexico. Chou just created Strat an new strategy game. BTT is interested in distributing this game so they entered into a deal where Chou got $25,000 for negotiation rights for ninety days. This agreement specified that all contracts were to be in writing and there would be no verbal contract. Before the time was up BTT, sent Chou an email that detailed the specified the agreements reached upon their meeting
Words: 511 - Pages: 3
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker LAW/421 Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker In this scenario, Big Time Toymaker had entered into an option contract with Chou whereby they paid him $25,000 for exclusive negotiation rights for distribution of his strategy game for 90 days. This negotiation agreement stated that no contract existed unless it was in writing. Three days before the 90-day period was over, BTT and Chou reached a verbal agreement at a meeting. Chou was to draft the agreement, but
Words: 1358 - Pages: 6
Big Time Toymaker Ronda Bonny LAW/421 AUGUST 13, 2012 JAMES ZACCARIA Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? After reading the case scenario, I do not believe either of the two parties involved ever established a binding distribution contract. It is true an oral distribution agreement was achieved just three days prior to the 90-day deadline, which was a condition established in the original negotiating contract. However, as clearly stated in the
Words: 734 - Pages: 3
BIG TIME TOY MAKER Larry E. Linton Law/421 October 27, 2014 Professor Rachel Lyne BIG TIME TOY MAKER 1.) The parties have a contract the moment that Chou and Big Time Toymaker (BTT) entered the exclusive negotiation agreement. A contract is considered perfected the moment the parties reached an agreement which signifies their consent, the object of the contract and the consideration or price. It bears to stress that the first element to test whether a contract has been perfected is that there must
Words: 1315 - Pages: 6
Case Scenario: Big Time Toy Maker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? Our textbook defines a contract as “a promise or a set of promises enforceable by law” (). A contract does not necesarily has to be in writing. A contract can be oral and enforceable. Big Time Toymaker and Chou took part in an oral contract. Big Time Toy Maker and Chou held a meeting where an oral distribution agreement was reached. In addition, Big Time Toy sent an email to Chou confirming the
Words: 402 - Pages: 2
Case Scenario: Big Time Toy Maker LAW/421 May 5, 2015 Case Scenario: Big Time Toy Maker At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? The two parties, Big Time Toymaker and Chou entered into a contract when they came to the initial agreement where Big Time would pay $25,000 for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90 day period. What facts may weigh in favor or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? The biggest factor in favor of Choe
Words: 521 - Pages: 3
Big Time Toy Maker Law / 421 Big Time Toy Maker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? Yes, both parties had a valid contract when they agreed upon the terms of the deal. They both agreed upon the terms and Chou accepted the twenty five thousand dollars from Big Time Toymaker. A written agreement was not needed due to BTT being only a distributer and not a producer. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract
Words: 448 - Pages: 2
Amanda Persico Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? The parties had an oral contract when BTT and Chou agreed on an oral distribution agreement three days before the 90-day period had expired. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? The facts that would weigh in favor for Chou were the meeting that took place 3 days prior to the 90-day expiration period, the
Words: 481 - Pages: 2
