Essay Available:
Pages:
3 pages/≈825 words
Sources:
5
Style:
APA
Subject:
Law
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 14.58
Topic:
Common Law or UCC: Aslakson v. Home Sav. Ass'n
Essay Instructions:
Read the following legal cases: Aslakson v. Home Sav. Ass'n, 416 N.W. 2d 786 (Minn. App. 1987); and Mogan v. Cargill, Inc., 856 P.2d 973 (1993) and write a 3 page paper identifying the subject matter of the controversy, whether the common law or the UCC (Article 2) would cover the contractual issues, and explain the reasons for your conclusions. Also, discuss when, in general, the UCC (Article 2) governs contracts and when the common law governs.
Links to cases:
http://law(dot)justia(dot)com/cases/minnesota/court-of-appeals/1987/c6-87-1497-0.html
https://scholar(dot)google(dot)com/scholar_case?case=11169625187381499128&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr
Essay Sample Content Preview:
Common Law or UCC
Student:
Professor:
Course title:
Date:
Introduction
When seeking to determine a matter, the first issue of consideration that the court looks at is the law applicable. This is very necessary so as to ensure that all modalities and parameters of the case are carefully considered. When it comes to contracts and the execution thereof, there are two sets of laws that the court will often refer to. The first set is common law which covers all transactions that are contractual in nature and which fall in the category of employment, intangible assets, real estate, insurance and services (Emmanuel, 2010). The second set that is considered on contractual transactions is the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) which covers all contract based transactions that relate to tangible assess such as a car, a house and other assets of a similar nature. This paper has focused on these two sources of law seeking to differentiate the two. In order to both the two issues into perspective, some case laws have been examined.
Aslakson v. Home Sav. Ass'n Facts:
Kurt and Jeanette had applied to buy a mobile home form Luxury Housing Inc. This transaction would be conducted by Home Savings Association. The transaction was concluded in 1975. Four years later, Kurt and Jeanette decided to sell off the home. Their first client was Anita Watson. One of the conditions for the sale to go through was that the purchaser was required to submit their credit records to Upper Northwest Payment Plan. Upon looking at her records, UNPP found that Anita had been late in making some of her debt obligations and on this basis, they declined her application.
The second client was the Hepolas who had been denied credit two months earlier by another institutions for mobile home purchase. Home Saving Association declined the application by Hepolas arguing that their credit history was insufficient. Upon further consideration, Home accepted the application by the Hepolas. However, they required them to give a down payment of between 2 to four monthly payments. The Hepolas declined to take up the offer. Kurt and Jeanette sued both Home and UNPP arguing that their grounds of rejection by their two clients were unsubstantiated. Kurt and Jeanette further argued that both respondents in this case had interfered with the earlier existing contracts.
Looking at the facts of the case and the subject matter of dispute, this matter falls well within Unifo...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now: