Premium Essay

Theory to Practice Btt

In: Business and Management

Submitted By myers55
Words 761
Pages 4
Role and Functions of Law
Kenneth Myers Sr.
Business Law 421
August 26,2013
Jeanne Cycan

Role and Functions of Law
Laws are created to regulate peoples behavior, which leads to a society that runs efficiently. According to the dictionary, the first definition of law is "a rule of conduct or procedure established by custom, agreement, or authority". Laws is a small word that can be defined in many different ways The word is small but the implications of the word are vast. Law continues to grow and expand. There are several types of law: constitutions, statutes, common law, equity, administrative regulations and decisions, treaties, ordinances, and executive orders. Constitution is the fundamental law of a nation, state, or society that establishes the authority and responsibility of the government and assures the people's rights. A statute is a law enacted by government. Some Laws are open to reason and interpretation. Laws are comprised of statutes and precedents, leading to rules that tell how to act in business and society. Laws also supply ethical standards and expectations, while providing rules of conduct, measures to enforce those rules, and a means for settling disputes. Other functions of law include: peacekeeping; checking government power and promoting personal freedom; facilitating planning and the realization of reasonable expectations; promoting economic growth through free competition; promoting social justice; and protecting the environment (Mallory, Barnes, Bowers, and
Langvardt). It is important to note that without laws to govern the actions of people and businesses, society would not be able to function effectively, and business would likely collapse.
Business law addresses statutes and regulations affecting businesses, families, and individuals in their related roles. A knowledge of business law is

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Law 421 Week 4 Big Time Toymaker

...find the next information: Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text. Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response: At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 (above)? What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract? Could BTT avoid this contract under the doctrine of mistake? Explain. Would either party have any other defenses that would allow the contract to be avoided? Assuming, arguendo, that this e-mail does constitute an agreement, what consideration supports this agreement? At the conclusion of the case, BTT declares that it's not thinking about distributing Chou’s new strategy game, Strat. Presuming BTT and Chou have got a deal, and BTT has breached the agreement by not distributing the game, discuss what remedies may or may not apply. General Questions - General General Questions Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text. Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response:...

Words: 362 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Law 421 Week 5 Article Review

...find the next information: Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text. Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response: At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 (above)? What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract? Could BTT avoid this contract under the doctrine of mistake? Explain. Would either party have any other defenses that would allow the contract to be avoided? Assuming, arguendo, that this e-mail does constitute an agreement, what consideration supports this agreement? At the conclusion of the case, BTT declares that it's not thinking about distributing Chou’s new strategy game, Strat. Presuming BTT and Chou have got a deal, and BTT has breached the agreement by not distributing the game, discuss what remedies may or may not apply. General Questions - General General Questions Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text. Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response:...

Words: 372 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Big Time Toymaker - Theory to Practice

...BIG TIME TOYMAKER - CASE SCENARIO 2 Big Time Toymaker - Case Scenario Upon completion of required reading of “Theory to Practice” scenario, I confidently can report that the two parties never prepared a written contract. A written contract was supposed to be created for a deal between Big Time Toymaker (BTT) a company, which develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys in North American and Chou who invented a new strategy game Strat. A contract was in process even the details had been identified, however; it fell through the cracks because of the management change at BTT. Initially, BTT paid Chou $25,000 for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period and held meeting where details were discuss and agreed upon. Chou received an e-mail with the details of the contract, however; nowhere on the e-mail did it note that it was a contract. A month a lapsed without any interaction between BTT and Chou than Chou received a fax from BTT requesting a draft for a distribution agreement contract. Chou took care of that immediately and did not hear back from BTT for several months. New management at BTT took over and made the decision to informed Chou that they are no longer interested. The facts weigh against Chou because there was intent to contract. An official contract was never created between the two parties, which was the requirement in the negotiations. Second, the e-mail that included all the contractual details was never identified as contract...

Words: 997 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Theory of Practice

...Theory to Practice David Dwight Sandoval Contemporary Law/421 January 15, 2015 Mrs. Monica Arvelo/University of Phoenix Theory to Practice Below are questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario “Theory to Practice”: Question 1: At what point if ever, did the parties have a contract? Answer: An contract/agreement was started with Chou. BTT paid him $25,000 in exchange for negotiation rights for 90-days. Before the agreement was drafted by Chou, a BTT manager sent Chou an e-mail repeating the key terms of the distribution agreement including price, time frames, and obligations of both parties. Chou believed that the email was meant to replace the earlier notion (draft contract). This contract was in place when it was sent from BTT to Chou. Terms have been agreed upon …this is an enforceable contract between both of the parties. Question 2: What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Answer: One fact that may weigh in favor of Chou, is the fact that there was a monetary agreement (BTT paid Chou $25,000/exchange for exclusive negotiation rights) between BTT and Chou. Since an email was used to send for the forms of communication between the parties, the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) possibly could be used for legal implications in favor of Chou. One fact that may way against Chou, is the fact that a written agreement was not established before the 90-day period. The exclusive negotiation...

Words: 554 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Week2

...Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text. Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response: At the end of the scenario, BTT states that it is not interested in distributing Chou’s new strategy game, Strat. Assuming BTT and Chou have a contract, and BTT has breached the contract by not distributing the game, discuss what remedies might or might not apply. Explain your answers and refer to Section 7-6 in Ch. 7 for support. Submit your answers – there should be 7 total. 1. There was never a contract. BTT asked Chou to fax them a distribution contract. Chou never did therefore BTT never had an agreed contract with Chou. 2. Things that will favor Chou are the e-mails that discussed agreed terms that would be needed for both parties to be able to do the distribution deal together. The things that will be against Chou is that BTT asked him to fax over a distribution contract in which he never did. 3. No, some will say it does because it is a recorded electronic communication. But it is not binding by any means. The two sides were mearly discussing terms. One side then asked for a contract without the other responding leaving them thinking that there was no deal. 4. By Chou not faxing over a distribution contract as requested BTT could pursue him under teh statue of frauds thinking that they had a deal with Chou for...

Words: 451 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Big Time Toymaker

...Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text. Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response: • At the end of the scenario, BTT states that it is not interested in distributing Chou’s new strategy game, Strat. Assuming BTT and Chou have a contract, and BTT has breached the contract by not distributing the game, discuss what remedies might or might not apply. 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? According to the reading, I do not see that BBT and Chou actually had engaged in an official contract at any point during their conversation about their plan to concrete one. Both parties entered into an exclusive negotiation for a period of 90 days so three days before this negotiation expired, they had reached a verbal distribution agreement. They also had stipulated in the negotiation that it would be no actually a distribution contract unless it was in writing. BTT sent an e-mail to Chou specifying all the terms of the distribution agreement which they had agreed upon, but neither party signed it. A verbal agreement was made by the two parties but they never made an official contract to be signed; therefore, a contract never existed 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? BTT had paid Chou $25,000 for an exclusive negotiation rights in...

Words: 1102 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Law/421 Week 4 Individual

...Theory to Practice LAW/421 January 21, 2012 Brian La Hargoue Theory to Practice A contract is an agreement a court of law will recognize. An agreement may result in a binding contract whether it is an oral or written agreement between parties (Melvin, 2011, p. 126). Contracts are put in place to protect both parties on either end of the agreement. A big time Toymaker (BTT) was interested in a new game invented by Chou. BTT entered into an agreement with Chou for exclusive rights to his inventory for a 90-day period at the cost of $25,000 (Melvin, 2011, p. 155). This paper will discuss some pros and cons of a contract, if and when a contract should apply to a situation, and some remedies for a breach of contract. Contract BTT and Chou made an exclusive negotiation agreement for a 90-day period. This agreement had stipulations that a contract had to be in writing within this period. Before the expiration of this period, the parties reached an oral agreement in a meeting followed by an e-mail from BTT to Chou repeating their oral agreement on paper. This electronic document reiterated the key terms of what was agreed upon in the meeting between the parties (Melvin, 2011, p. 155). With areas agreed upon, the parties should be considered under contract. Positive and Negative Facts of Agreement There are several areas in this simulation that show positive and negative facts for Chou in terms of the intent of contract. The facts that weigh in favor of Chou: * Meeting...

Words: 1039 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Contracts

...Theory to Practice Susan Towers 421 April 21st 2014 Roseali Drawbaough Theory to Practice When entering into a contract, it is important to note the elements of what makes a contract a legal binding agreement between two parties. The Theory to practice case is between Mr. Chou and BBT. Mr. Chou agreed soul distributorship on a 90-day contract agreement in return that BBT paid a sum for Mr. Chou’s product. Agreement, mutual assent, consideration, and capacity legality made up the two parties entrance into the contract. As in the case of BBT and Mr. Chou all contracts have differences to how they are perceived, what makes them legal in oral and written form that can either be remedied or voided by various laws and regulations. Questions 1-6 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? The parties had an agreement when all the elemental requirements were formed in the original agreement between price, distribution, payment and terms were agreed upon. Approvals of the terms are supported by Consideration, capacity, and performance. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? The facts would weigh in favor of Chou because of the language and actions of intent to contract were reasonably certain. The offeror and offerre both had serious intentions to be legally bound by the terms of the contract. 3. Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on...

Words: 898 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Law/ 421 Week 5 Presentation

...Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text. Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response: 1) At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? I don’t believe that there was a contract because even though there was an e-mail describing the contents of a draft of a contract, there were no signatures approving it. 2) What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Although BTT had made a large payment to Chau, the fact is that no written agreement was agreed on which works against Chau. 3)Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 (above)? No. The fact that Chau and BTT were emailing each other is irrelevant to the existence of a contract, there were merely talking about it and never memorialized it in contract form. 4) What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract? This transaction had a value of over $500 and as such the UCC provisions could apply had the contract been in writing and had been accepted by both parties. 5) Could BTT avoid this contract under the doctrine of mistake? Explain. Would either party have any other defenses that would allow the contract to be avoided? No, BTT could not avoid contract under the doctrine of mistake, or any other defense, because both parties believed...

Words: 399 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Big Time Toymaker

...us various lessons in business law and communication. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? Based on the information provided in “Theory to Practice” the parties officially had a contract three days before the 90-day period when a BTT manager sent Chou the “Strat Deal” email. This email repeated the key terms of the distribution agreement; it included the obligations of both parties, price and time frames. The email stated that al the terms had been agreed upon (Melvin, 2011 p. 155). It was normal for Chou to assume that this email replaced the earlier notion of him drafting the contract with the same information mentioned in the e-mail. Assuming he did not clarify this with the BTT Manager who emailed him, he should have taken the initiative in confirming this. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contrast? The biggest fact to weigh in favor of Chou is the $25,00 he was paid by BTT in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights. Because BTT can’t go back and say they paid him the $25,000 as part of the actual distribution deal, because as we know the $25,000 was just for the exclusive negotiation rights. The lack of communication and the way BTT and Chou communicated could weigh against Chou. According to the information provided it seems as if BTT and Chou last spoke face to face, the day the “Strat Deal” was orally agreed upon. Besides that, e-mail and fax was the...

Words: 1002 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Big Time Toy Maker

...Scenario: Big Time Toymaker | Read the “Theory to Practice” section at the end of Ch. 6 of the text.Answer Questions 1 through 6 based on the scenario in the “Theory to Practice” section, and complete the following in your response: * At the end of the scenario, BTT states that it is not interested in distributing Chou’s new strategy game, Strat. Assuming BTT and Chou have a contract, and BTT has breached the contract by not distributing the game, discuss what remedies might or might not apply. * Explain your answers and refer to Section 7-6 in Ch. 7 for support.Submit your answers. | 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? After reading the scenario, I believe there was a contract when BTT sent an email to Chau referencing the intital terms of agreement. Here’s the verbage from the scenario… “a BTT manager sent Chou an e-mail with the subject line “Strat Deal” that repeated the key terms of the distribution agreement including price, time frames, and obligations of both parties.” This is where the deal became legal binding. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Mutual Assent. Both parties had verbally agreed to the deal. A reasonable person would have assumed the deal was going to go through because BTT paid Chau 25K for negotiation rights for a 90 day period. At this point there was an enforceable agreement between Chau and BTT. 3. Does the fact that the parties...

Words: 745 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Toy Maker

...did the parties have a contract? In the theory of practice, big time toy maker, the parties involved did not have a contract. In the scenario it stated that the parties had reached an agreement 3 days prior to the end of the 90 day deadline, which was set in the negotiation period.” The exclusive negotiation agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. Just three days before the expiration of the 90-day period”. (Melvin, 2011,). If there is no legal binding and no signature, then there is no contract. 2. Some facts weigh in favor or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract are • The board games were already paid out by BTT, which was $25K for the exclusive negotiation rights. This helps Chou to believe that the company had intent in arriving at a distribution agreement • An oral agreement meeting with a follow-up e-mail from the BTT manager on the key agreement. • A Fax from BTT requesting a draft for a distribution agreement contract agreement and Chou responded immediately Facts that weigh against Chou are: • The negotiation statement stated that no contract exists unless it is in writing there was no signature to bind the contract. • The 90-day deadline passed with only an oral agreement • The word “contract” has left off the e-mail received from the BTT manager • Chou failed to draft a distribution agreement contract until BTT sent a fax requesting that he do So, which took...

Words: 1260 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Week 4 Big Time Toy Maker

...Big Time Toy Maker Could BTT avoid this contract under the doctrine of mistake? Explain. Would either party have any other defenses that would allow the contract to be avoided? Chou could take BTT to court for breach of contract. When BTT paid Chou $2,500 for, and Chou gave BTT exclusive negotiation rights for 90 days, they both mutually assented to a legally binding agreement. Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), if the contract of the sale of goods is $500, or more, and any lease transactions for the sale of $1000, or more, the statute the statute of frauds apply (Melvin, 2011). The $2,500 Chao received met this requirement. When BTT sent Chou an email 3 days before the expiration of the 90 day agreement, which included the price, time frames, and the obligations of both parties, it signified to Chao that BTT still intends to do business with Chao, and meets all the requirement for a contract. Chao's intentions were to draft the contract as agreed upon, but Chao made a unilateral mistake, he had an erroneous belief that the email between BTT and Chao, with all the terms already in it, plus the mutual assent of the two parties, was the actual contract. Thirty days passed before BTT, requested the distribution agreement contract from Chao, by fax. Up to this point, Chao thought he already had an agreement through the email. By BTT sending the fax, it signifies to Chao that the BTT wishes to proceed with the business transaction. Chao sends the draft immediately...

Words: 393 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Big Time Toymaker

...Toymaker (BTT) granted Chou an agreement to a option contract. BTT pays Chou $25K to keep exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. Therefore, BTT purchased the rights to negotiate a distribution agreement for Chou’s invention (a board game). The agreement stipulated that at the end of the 90-day period, if the parties could not come to terms on a distribution deal. Chou would be free to enter into a contract with another distribution company and keeps the $25K. This is a valid enforceable oral contract between BTT and Chou. Upon close study, I do not believe that the parties concerned ever had a distribution agreement contract. The negotiation agreement specified that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. The two came to an oral agreement three days before the 90-day deadline. Immediately, following the meeting the BTT manager sent Chou an e-mail with “Strat Deal” in the subject line, reiterating the key terms of the oral distribution agreement in regard to price, time frames, and obligations of both parties (Melvin, 2011). However, there was no evidence to show that Chou ever accepted the offer via e-mail in accordance with the governing common law mailbox rule. Only an oral agreement was reached; with no legally binding draft and the signature of both parties present, no contract exists. 2. What facts may weigh in favor or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Facts that weight in favor of Chou: • BTT had paid...

Words: 588 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Demonstrative Communication

...Theory to Practice Normally the contract would have been formed when before the expiration of the 90 day period the parties reached an oral distribution agreement at the meeting. However, the exclusive negotiation agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. The contract was formed when the BTT manager sent the "Strat Deal" to Chou. Since the e-mail contained all the key terms of the distribution agreement including price, time frames, and obligation of both parties, the e-mail complied with the requirement that the contract should be in writing. When the BTT manager sent the e-mail, the contract was formed (Andrews. N, 2011). There is an objective manifestation of intent to contract. The first manifestation of the intent to contract is the payment by BTT of $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. The second manifestation of the intent to contract is the meeting between BTT managers and Chou where they reached an oral distribution agreement. Third the sending of e-mail drafted by BTT manager shows the intent to contract. Fourth, the stating of all the terms that had been agreed upon in the BTT manager e-mail shows the intent to contract (Barnett. R, 2010). According to the contract law, the offer is a manifestation of intent. During the negotiations an offer was made to Chou. This was the manifestation of intent to contract. The second manifestation was the valid acceptance of the offer during the meeting...

Words: 801 - Pages: 4