Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    Written Assignment Unit 4 Sherwood V Walker

    Uploaded by

    Moheud Malic
    The document summarizes the 19th century case Sherwood v. Walker, which centered around the sale of a cow named Rose. Both parties agreed to the sale under the mutual mistaken belief that Rose was barren, when in fact she was pregnant. This mutual mistake was considered material to the contract. The court ruled that the contract could be set aside to prevent unfairness, since both parties acted based on the same erroneous belief. The case established the precedent that contracts can be revoked if founded upon a mutual mistake of a material fact. It demonstrates how contract law can adapt to complex human interactions and aim for fairness when resolving disputes arising from shared misconceptions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Written Assignment Unit 4 Sherwood V Walker

    Uploaded by

    Moheud Malic
    4 views4 pages
    The document summarizes the 19th century case Sherwood v. Walker, which centered around the sale of a cow named Rose. Both parties agreed to the sale under the mutual mistaken belief that Rose was barren, when in fact she was pregnant. This mutual mistake was considered material to the contract. The court ruled that the contract could be set aside to prevent unfairness, since both parties acted based on the same erroneous belief. The case established the precedent that contracts can be revoked if founded upon a mutual mistake of a material fact. It demonstrates how contract law can adapt to complex human interactions and aim for fairness when resolving disputes arising from shared misconceptions.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Written Assignment Unit 4 Sherwood v Walker - Copy

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document summarizes the 19th century case Sherwood v. Walker, which centered around the sale of a cow named Rose. Both parties agreed to the sale under the mutual mistaken belief that Rose was barren, when in fact she was pregnant. This mutual mistake was considered material to the contract. The court ruled that the contract could be set aside to prevent unfairness, since both parties acted based on the same erroneous belief. The case established the precedent that contracts can be revoked if founded upon a mutual mistake of a material fact. It demonstrates how contract law can adapt to complex human interactions and aim for fairness when resolving disputes arising from shared misconceptions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    4 views4 pages

    Written Assignment Unit 4 Sherwood V Walker

    Uploaded by

    Moheud Malic
    The document summarizes the 19th century case Sherwood v. Walker, which centered around the sale of a cow named Rose. Both parties agreed to the sale under the mutual mistaken belief that Rose was barren, when in fact she was pregnant. This mutual mistake was considered material to the contract. The court ruled that the contract could be set aside to prevent unfairness, since both parties acted based on the same erroneous belief. The case established the precedent that contracts can be revoked if founded upon a mutual mistake of a material fact. It demonstrates how contract law can adapt to complex human interactions and aim for fairness when resolving disputes arising from shared misconceptions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 4

    Written Assignment Unit 4: Sherwood vs Walker

    University of the People

    BUS 3305-01 – Business Law and Ethics


    Dmitri Illuishin, Instructor
    December 13, 2023
    In the bustling legal landscape of American contract law, few cases stand out as vividly as

    Sherwood v. Walker, a 19th-century legal drama centered around – believe it or not – a cow. But

    beneath the seemingly mundane case lies a tale woven with the threads of mutual mistake,

    fairness, and the very essence of contractual obligations. Let's delve into this battle involving

    cattle while trying to untangle the legal knots and exploring its relevance in the modern business

    arena.

    The story unfolded in Michigan, in 1887. Theodore Sherwood, a banker and farmer, got into a

    legal conflict with the Walker brothers over a seemingly inconsequential cow called Rose. Rose,

    it turns out, wasn't just any moo-ving creature; she was believed to be barren, a crucial detail as

    breeding cows fetched a significantly higher price. Both parties lulled into this shared

    misconception, agreed on a measly sum for Rose. Imagine the surprise, then, when after the sale,

    Rose proved to be pregnant, her moo-ving potential soaring with the impending arrival of a calf.

    This also meant that she could now produce milk which would further increase her value.

    (Sherwood v. Walker, 1887)

    Here's where the legal mud gets thick. Sherwood, elated with the unexpected fertility windfall,

    refused to return Rose after buying her. The Walkers, naturally, cried foul. The central legal

    conundrum: could the contract, built upon a mutual mistake about Rose's barrenness, be

    revoked?

    The Michigan Supreme Court took a nuanced approach. They acknowledged the principle of

    caveat emptor, "buyer beware," where the buyer assumes the risk of unknown defects. However,

    they carved out an exception: when a mutual mistake about a material fact, like Rose's fertility,

    forms the very foundation of the agreement, the contract can be set aside to prevent unfairness.

    Applying this lens to the udderly peculiar situation, the court reasoned that both parties, acting
    on the same erroneous belief, couldn't be held accountable for their misjudgment. Therefore, the

    Walkers retained the right to revoke the contract and reclaim their cattle treasure. (Sherwood v.

    Walker, 1887)

    Now, rewind to the present. Imagine a tech startup selling cutting-edge software based on a

    revolutionary algorithm, only to discover it's riddled with critical bugs—a glaring flaw

    unbeknownst to both buyer and seller. The Sherwood v. Walker precedent offers a framework

    for resolving such disputes. If the bug's existence was crucial to the software's value, the buyer,

    armed with the "mutual mistake" shield, could potentially seek a contract rescission or

    renegotiation, preventing them from being saddled with a malfunctioning product.

    Ultimately, Sherwood v. Walker stands as a testament to the law's capacity to adapt to the

    complexities of human interaction, even when those complexities involve a four-legged, milk-

    producing protagonist. It reminds us that contracts, though binding, are not unyielding monoliths,

    and when fairness dictates, the law can bend to rectify imbalances born from shared

    misconceptions. So, the next time you find yourself in a contractual conundrum, remember the

    tale of Rose, the cow who moo-ved the legal landscape, and the enduring wisdom it whispers: in

    the marketplace of agreements, fairness is always the currency of a just outcome.

    Word Count: 520 words


    References

    Sherwood v. Walker, 66 Mich. 568, 33 N.W. 919 (Mich. 1887). Retrieved from

    https://casetext.com/case/sherwood-v-walker

    Lau, T. & Johnson, L. (2011). The legal and ethical environment of business (Vol. 1). Retrieved
    from https://my.uopeople.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=316130

    You might also like