Constitutional Law reflection prompts: Homework

Joshua Nazario

Legal Studies B.S., Florida Gulf Coast University

PLA 3428/CRN 10914: Constitutional Law

Dr. Robert Diotalevi

March 3rd-April 3rd, 2024

How should the court decide? Cite all relevant law and legal theories explaining fully.

Issue: Was the offer, based on October 16th, hitherto effective since the day sent?

Facts: Ralph purchased a property as part of Farms Associates. Market price for the

property, in 2008, listed a reasonable–compulsive– price. After a series of negotiations,

Farms associated brokered a deal, to which Ralph agreed. Subsequently, Farms associates

proposed a counter offer and posited that the offer will extend to 5pm, October 17th.

Ralph’s attorney was the recipient of the message and, as time became thither, Farms

associates attorney received Ralph’s attorney’s email on October 19th.On October 16th,

Farms had entered a covenant with another party. Immediately, Ralph sued Farms,

claiming that his acceptance on October 16th was effective on the day that it was sent.

Rule: Pursuant of Florida Statue 125.355 on proposed purchase(s) of real property;

confidentiality of records; and procedure to acquire by purchase any real property for a

public purpose, every appraisal, offer, or counteroffer must be established via writing.

Such appraisals, offers, and counteroffers MUST not be available for public disclosure or
inspection and are vindicated from the provisions of statue 119.07(section 1) until an

option contract is executed or, if no option contract is executed, until 30 days before a

contract or agreement for purchase is considered for approval by the board of county

commissioners. If a contract or agreement for purchase is not forwarded to the board of

county commissioners for approval, the exemption from section. 119.07(1) will reach a

cessation 30 days after the termination of negotiations.

Application: Following application of FS. 125.355 and supplementary statute 119.07, the

court may proceed with the following fiat: FS. 119.07 requires that, should a 30 day

period NOT pass, after a contract or agreement is upheld to a particular offeree, a

counteroffer may be opened liberally for public disclosure. Thereby, in the context of Mr.

Ralph’s predicament, it is safe to say that the counteroffer proposed by Farm associates

was within reasonable standards. Withal, the disclosure of such a proposition as genuine

as real property is permissible since: 1.) realtor/offeror, while engaged in an oral contract

with an interested offeree, disclosed the market price on public domain BEFORE the 30

day period. 2.) A counteroffer to Ralph was not only proposed to just him but extended to

a greater, broader, browsing network.

Conclusion: Court shall NOT rescind the offer/deal executed between Ralph and Farm

associates. Court shall mark Ralph’s inclination to sue null and void.

Reference:

Statutes & constitution :view statutes : Online sunshine, March 30, 2024.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0

199%2F0125%2FSections%2F0125.355.html.
 Fully discuss the merits of Art’s claim citing all legal sources used.

Rule 4-1.6 - CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION, R. Regul. FL. Bar 4-1.6:

Legal and non-legal individuals, like Art, are expected to fulfill the following: Remain

confidential on matters between other employers. Art’s assertion to maintain adamant on his

decision to accept and prolong the offer is justified in accordance with 45.061 and its addendum

on what is permissible in mutually agreeing on the offer (that is, a bilateral agreement). FS.061

adduces that, “... any time more than 60 days after the service of a summons and complaint on a

party but not less than 60 days (or 45 days if it is a counteroffer) before trial, any party may serve

upon an adverse party a written offer, which offer shall not be filed with the court and shall be

denominated as an offer under this section, to settle a claim for the money, property, or relief

specified in the offer and to enter into a stipulation dismissing the claim or to allow judgment to

be entered accordingly.” Settlement, as done with both Sue and Art, is administered when the

Offeror stipulates a condition with duty attached–in which, the offeree must comply in order to

fulfill the bilateral agreement. In this case, Sue sent a telegram detailing her revised offer in

attempts to sway Art to consider his chances in attending and becoming an associate with Sue’s

firm (PROVIDED THAT HE does not violate Rule 4-1.6). This digital covenant made with both

Sue and Art has ensued 5 days, of which, Sue may recant her offer. Art’s refusal may not be

warranted as meritorious because FS.45.061 allows the offeror to revoke and offer that may have

had miscommunicated, misappropriated, or misled an offeree to submit to an unwanted duty in

the contract.
 To: Lank

From: Legal Aid division of Southwest Florida

Date: 02/18/24

RE: Frank v. Lank Disputation 18th of February 2024.

—-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CASE: Frank v. Lank Disputation 18th of February 2024.

Petitioner: Lank [Retired Lecturer]

Respondent: Frank

Respondent: Lank

Facts: It has been brought to the attention of our faculty that our client, Lank (anonymous) has

toiled to receive proper injunction relief from Mr. Frank. It appears you and Mr.Frank have

vowed to uphold a covenant; that is to say, you have agreed to obliged to your oath in paying Mr.

Lank some $500 to $750 for his services offered to your son, Simon. However, Frank's son's

recent episode has prompted Frank to eject his son from the classes–leaving you without pay.

Legal Resolution: Lank, in your best interest, it is profitable to cite the following statues:

672.201 Formal requirements; statute of frauds.—

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section a contract for the sale of goods for the price
of $500 or more is not enforceable by way of action or defense unless there is some writing
sufficient to indicate that a contract for sale has been made between the parties and signed by the
party against whom enforcement is sought or by his or her authorized agent or broker. A writing
is not insufficient because it omits or incorrectly states a term agreed upon but the contract is not
enforceable under this paragraph beyond the quantity of goods shown in such writing.
(2) Between merchants if within a reasonable time a writing in confirmation of the contract
and sufficient against the sender is received and the party receiving it has reason to know its
contents, it satisfies the requirements of subsection (1) against such party unless written notice of
objection to its contents is given within 10 days after it is received.
(3) A contract which does not satisfy the requirements of subsection (1) but which is valid in
other respects is enforceable:
(a) If the goods are to be specially manufactured for the buyer and are not suitable for sale to
others in the ordinary course of the seller’s business and the seller, before notice of repudiation is
received and under circumstances which reasonably indicate that the goods are for the buyer, has
made either a substantial beginning of their manufacture or commitments for their procurement;
or
(b) If the party against whom enforcement is sought admits in his or her pleading, testimony
or otherwise in court that a contract for sale was made, but the contract is not enforceable under
this provision beyond the quantity of goods admitted; or
(c) With respect to goods for which payment has been made and accepted or which have
been received and accepted (s. 672.606). It is hereby profitable to cite F.S.672.606 because you
and frank have printed signatures on the document to which you and Frank pledged to fulfill both
ends of the contract. Second, because the compensation awarded exceeded $500—and that Frank
midway removed his son during the period in which the contract was in effect–it is unlawful that
Frank had committed the breach. Following such, it is recommended that you escalate this matter
to litigation, whereby you can (3rd) preface your argument of “injunctive relief”, “breach of
contract”, and “infraction of Statute of Frauds”.
3b.) FS. 672.606 is expository enough to provide a prospective client with a reasonable course
of action to state the “statute of frauds”, state the “infraction of breaching the contract”, and
“failing to obligate in financial compensation”.

Restatement § 162 a misrepresentation of a material fact is a paramount defense to rely on.

 Who should the rule in favor of and under what legal theory? Fully explain citing all
sources utilized.

Issue: Who should rule in favor of and under what legal theory? Fully explain citing all
sources utilized.
Facts: Client Bill, while on an excursion, saved the life of a woman by the name of Sally.
After saving Sally from impending danger, Sally orally pledged to leave him $10,000 in
her will. This oral statement was definite, not acquiesced. Unfortunately, Mrs. Sally had
passed away and her legacy continued to her husband. All proprietorship that she had
possessed was then transitioned over to Fred, her Husband. Fred shortly passed and the
proprietorship (as well as the $10,000) was in the hands of Fred’s executor of the estate
(his wife’s passing and ever growing deterioration of mental faculties led to the
acquisition of an executor). The executor believes Sally’s oral promise was null and was
not valid to renege. Bill contests otherwise.
Rule: Pursuant of Florida Statute 733.67, “A personal representative shall be granted a
commission payable from the estate assets without court order as compensation for
ordinary services.” Florida Statute 672.606 renders a contract enforceable when a
sufficient act like written statements, a promissory estoppel, or other forms of written
communication are in place of a contract.
Application: Sally’s claim was orally announced, and thus, not justified as an
enforceable contract under the provisions of Florida Statute 672.606. Fred’s continuation
of Sally’s legacy is neither enforceable since there lacks appropriate, sufficient, written
communication and stipulations to render the contract enforceable.
Conclusion: Executor of Estate shall rule in favor and continue to, unfortunately,
withhold the compensation orally promised to Bill.
Discuss whether or not you think this is a good idea and why. Cite sources relied upon.
Inclusion of poverty and lack of education are categorically independent from the “incapacity”
categorically. Not only is it over-bureaucratic to include these titles under incapacity, but it
merely explains incapacity. Incapacity varies due to multiple factors. That is to say, it is
introduced into a society and should be addressed in different manners. Withal, including poverty
as well as lack of education as a factor would decrease the overall intention of this categorical
attribute. Supplemental context to aid in this reasoning may be attributed to F.S. 287.057. Here, a
legal representative [not a lawyer] shall vow to request a proposal given they do: b) ”Request
for proposals.—An agency shall use a request for proposals when the purposes and uses for
which the commodity, group of commodities, or contractual service being sought can be
specifically defined and the agency is capable of identifying necessary deliverables. Various
combinations or versions of commodities or contractual services may be proposed by a
responsive vendor to meet the specifications of the solicitation document.”

6.) Prepare for Henrietta a memo with your analysis and legal opinion of her proposed
legislation. Explain punitive damages pertaining to contracts, what they are and how they work,
as well as your opinion as to her idea. Cite cases and laws pertaining to the same to back up your
ideas and statements.

To: Henrietta

From: Legal Aid division of Southwest Florida

Date: 04/02/2024

RE: Henrietta vs. Home Renovation Company LLC. (2042)

—--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CASE:Henrietta vs. Home Renovation Company LLC. (2042)

Petitioner: Henrietta

Respondent: Henrietta

Respondent: Home Renovation Company LLC.

Facts: Mrs.Henrietta, it is supposed that you and your contractor had signed a legal, formal,

contract document stating your commitment to fulfill the compensatory requirement of the

contract, while your contractor obliges to work a duty to fulfill their obligation end. However, it
was forwarded that your contractor did not install the marble counter in your kitchen. You

claimed, verbatim, “They have deliberately violated [our] agreement, saying that senator Lowlife

offered twice as much money for the same work”. Consequently, the Renovation LLC. did not

follow back with an email explaining the reason for abortion of their agreement to install the

marble cabinets. This, indeed, is a classic case scenario involving misappropriation of deeds in a

contract and a failure to abide by the requirements.

Suggested Action: It is required that our representatives use F.S. 672.606 and F.S. 287.057 to

bolster your claim on the grounds of receiving punitive damages. Punitive damages of this

degree include: emotional distress following the denial of services, installation fee injunctions,

and ditto. Denial of services and being “doubled-crossed” for brevity sake is an infraction to

statute 287.057 and would require immediate attention in this area; injunctive relief may be

administered to assuage this emotional distress and will impose a mandatory court order for the

LLC. to install the cabinets, with no contention.

7.) In this scenario, the contract administered on duty alluded that Howard would pay Molly, as

trustee for Sam, $500/month for the support and education of Sam. Inasmuch Sam pursues his

college education. Sam is stipulated to pay the amount to Molly until Sam fulfills academia

studies-thereby the Breach of contract suit against Howard is justified and he is mandated to

compensate the amount. Dealing with Child Support, I posit that Howard discontinue his

payments for Sam since he has hitherto started working and married. The contract, in a reality

sense, fails to include a clause that places a cessation on a course which could be considered as a

factor. By and by, Howard needs to compensate for the education of Sam.
8.) A. Yes, Maker is obligated to sell the presses to News for $2.4 million. As mentioned, the

transaction commenced with printing presses and, thereby, will be handled under the sphere of

the UCC. All the elements of a valid contract are present here. The telegram forwarded by the

Seller, Maker’s salesman, is a classic demonstration of a valid offer. Boss’s message to Seller is

viewed as a valid acceptance and the message was absent of any ambiguity. Consideration is

understood to be the amount of $2.4 million.

The letter which was telegraphed by Maker to Boss on 5th December was rendered ineffective as

late as December 1st.

2. Since this is a UCC contract the trite ‘cover’ remedy will be readily usable.. The buyer may

receive goods at a higher price from another seller and the remnant amount shall be salvaged.

A recommended panacea, then, for News will be employing specific performance. Elements of

feasibility and mutuality are conspicuous. To close, Maker does not offer valid defenses to the

table the Maker sought to aggrandize their account by taking half a million for their own leisure,

instead of fulfilling other end of obligation. Likely by court order, Maker will have to forfeit

press for the consideration of $2.4 million.

 Work Cited:

Statutes & constitution :view statutes : Online sunshine, April 2, 2024.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=060
0-0699%2F0672%2F0672.html.

Statutes & constitution :view statutes : Online sunshine, March 30, 2024.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=010
0-0199%2F0125%2FSections%2F0125.355.html.

Statutes & constitution :view statutes : Online sunshine, April 2, 2024.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=020
0-0299%2F0287%2FSections%2F0287.057.html.

Statutes & constitution :view statutes : Online sunshine, April 2, 2024.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-07
99%2F0768%2FSections%2F0768.72.