Reference no: EM133659952
Assignment:
Donovan v. RRL Corporation, 26 Cal 4th 266 (2001) is a case that initially began in California's trial court, after which it was then appealed to the California Court of Appeal.The loser of that round then appealed that decision to the California Supreme Court! This assignment focuses solely and exclusively on the California Supreme Courtdecision.
DIRECTIONS:
Using the above-reference legal citation, look up the California Supreme Court opinion on the internet. Make sure you are reading the California Supreme Court decision, and not one of the lower court decisions! (You can do that by using the citation above. If you do not recall what a legal citation is, review the Appendix of Chapter One: the Nature of Law.)
This case reviews multiple issues. Some relate to the Offer Chapter which we studied this week. Other issues examined in this opinion relate to future chapter concepts you have yet to study, like when contracts are voidable, & the Statute of Frauds.
Questions 2-5 of this written assignment focuses solely on the Offer Chapter- related issues raised between Roman Numeral I and Roman Numeral II of this California Supreme Court decision. You do not need to read beyond them to complete this assignment!
Make sure you are reading the actual decision, not a summary, & confine your answer solely to identifying the facts that gave rise to this lawsuit plus these offer-chapter related issues addressed by the court:
1. How it all started:
a.) Who-sued-whom? (In answering this question, name or kind of party aside, make sure you also identify which one was the plaintiff and which one was the defendant.)
b.) Briefly describe what happened that led to a lawsuit being filed. (DO NOT CUT AND PASTE. Summarize in your own words. Limit your facts to 2-4 sentences.)
2. What legal argument did the DEFENDANT assert in relation to whether its newspaper ad was an offer?
3. Did the California Supreme Court decide to apply the Restatement 2nd of Contracts general rule on ads to this case or did they decide the issue on a different basis?
(limit your answer to one of the following choices):
"Yes, they did applied the Restatements 2nd of Contracts general rule, or "No, they decided the issue in this case on a different basis."
4. What exact rule of law did the California Supreme Court actually apply in determining that the Lexus of Westminster newspaper ad was an offer and what does that rule say?
5. Who won this round of the California Supreme Court appeal on the issue of whether or not the newspaper ad was an offer - plaintiff or defendant - and why? (Limit your answer to 3 sentences or less.)