Remedies Final Examination
December 10, 1998Examination Number______
Professor Wells
Instructions:
Upon receiving this exam booklet, write your bluebook/exam number in the upper right hand corner of the first page of the exam booklet.
There are 3 questions in this examination: Be sure that your exam has all 3 questions. Answer each question separately, using the corresponding exam question number (and subsections where necessary). All answers must be contained in the blue book provided.
If possible, use a pen with blue or black ink. Write on only one side of the page. Do not tear pages out of the bluebook. Do not use pages of the bluebook for scratch paper.
This is an open book exam. You may refer to the textbooks assigned for this class, any materials that were handed out in class, your class notes, and any outlines you have prepared specifically for this class. No calculators may be used during the examination. Do notconsult any other materials or persons when taking this exam. Consulting any other materials or persons is an Honor Code violation.
Each question has a suggested time limit, which is the amount of time I believe necessary to answer the question. Be advised that the amount of time allotted for each question is roughly equivalent to the total possible points for that question. In other words, the longer the question, the more weight to be given it in the grading process. Use your time wisely.
In general, we have not studied the law of a particular state in this class. In answering questions, use the general principles of law that we studied in class. However, to the extent we discussed some Missouri law in class, you should discuss it on the exam if it would apply in a particular setting or if it poses a contrast to the general principles we studied in class.
You will have three hours & 15 minutes to finish this examination. At the end of the examination, place your exam inside your bluebook and turn them in.
Question 1:(This question consists of three sub-questions imbedded within the fact pattern. Answer each sub-question separately.)
Linduh is a physician who operates a reproductive health clinic in the town of Cambridge. She provides abortions as part of her services. Linduh leases her clinic from Roy. Several years ago they entered into a written agreement whereby Linduh=s current lease runs until June 1, 1999. The lease contract also gives her the unconditional right to extend the lease for another five years as long as she notifies Roy at least 30 days prior to June 1, 1999. When the contract was entered, Roy was aware that Linduh was to operate a reproductive health clinic which might include abortion services.
Over the last several years, anti-abortion advocates have protested outside of Linduh=s clinic. These protests have resulted in some violence, disruption of access to other businesses in the neighborhood, and loss of sales to neighboring businesses as a result of the public=s general fear of going into the neighborhood. Businesses in the neighborhood of Linduh=s clinic also have incurred decreased property values as a result of the disruption.
On December 1, 1998, Linduh notified Roy that she was exercising her right to extend the lease after June 1, 1999. On that same day, Roy told Linduh that because of the constant disruption around her clinic, he would terminate her lease on June 1, 1999 and would refuse to honor her option to extend the lease.
(1)Linduh wants to bring an action for specific performance forcing Roy to honor the conditions of their contract (which does not present a Statute of Frauds problem). She is concerned that her lawsuit is not yet ripe. Advise her as to the ripeness of her lawsuit. (6 minutes)
Linduh was so angry with Roy for his above actions that she decided to find a new location for her clinic and not to contest Roy=s refusal to extend the lease. She entered into an agreement with Buzz to lease a building for her clinic in the town of New Haven, which is about 50 miles from Cambridge. New Haven business owners near the proposed clinic site are incensed. They filed a lawsuit against Buzz and Linduh in state court seeking to enjoin the lease because Linduh=s clinic will constitute a nuisance. At trial, plaintiffs gave evidence regarding the violence, disruption, loss of business and decreased property values incurred by Linduh=s neighbors at her previous clinic site in Cambridge. They argue that such events are likely to occur in New Haven as well. Linduh=s evidence established that Buzz was the only landlord willing to lease her space if she provided abortions; thus, she would have to stop providing abortions if the lawsuit succeeded. As a result, there would be no abortion services available within the entire state in which Cambridge and New Haven are located. Although abortions account for only 30 percent of her total business, Linduh feels very strongly about being able to provide this ever-decreasing service to women. Buzz will have little trouble finding a new lessee if the lawsuit is successful.
(2)Discuss whether plaintiffs are likely to obtain a permanent injunction barring location of the clinic in New Haven. (24 minutes)
1
Assume that Linduh did eventually locate her clinic in New Haven. Within months, protestors began picketing and causing disruption at Linduh=s new clinic. Linduh filed a lawsuit in state court and obtained a permanent injunction barring the protestors from trespassing, destroying property or blocking access to the clinic. All protestors were given notice of the injunction. Recently, five protestors subject to this injunction violated it by pouring glue in the locks of all entrances and chaining themselves to the entrance of the clinic and blocking access for 10 consecutive days. As a result of these actions, the protestors caused approximately $8,000 damage to the clinic. At a contempt hearing, the trial judge found that Linduh had been damaged in the amount of $8,000 and required that protestors pay her that amount. The court also found that the protestors= wilful violation of its earlier order warranted further imposition of monetary sanctions in the amount of $200,000, to be split up equally among the contemnors. The court=s order further excused the contemnors from paying the $200,000 fine if, within 30 days of the order, they filed with the court and published in local newspapers a confession of their wrongdoing and an affirmation of their intent to abide by the permanent injunction in the future. The court=s contempt hearing was conducted as a civil proceeding with notice to all parties but without a jury.
(3)The protestors have appealed the contempt sanctions on the basis that inappropriate procedural protections were used at the contempt hearing. Discuss whether their appeal will succeed.
(20 minutes)
Examination continued on next page.
1
Question 2:deleted
1
Question 3
This question contains a series of 6 self-contained short answer questions, labeled A-F. Make sure your exam contains all sub-questions. Your answers to these questions should be short and to the point. These are not lengthy essay questions and you will not have time to treat them as such.
Subquestion A: (25 minutes)
Bill inherited 100 shares of GTE stock valued at $60/share. In contemplation of selling the stock, Bill removed the shares from his safe and placed them in his briefcase. Newt, Bill=s sworn enemy, entered Bill=s office, rifled through Bill=s briefcase, found the shares of stock, and decided to steal them. After stealing the shares of stock, Newt sold the GTE stock for $6,000 which he then deposited in his bank account. Prior to that deposit, Newt had $10,000 of his own money in the account. Newt then wrote a check for $6,000 and purchased 200 shares of IBM stock at $30/share. Newt then withdrew $5,000 from the account and purchased 2 cases of premium wine B which he drank immediately. During his drinking binge, Newt took part in a high stakes poker game at which he won $10,000. When he sobered up he deposited that money in his checking account. Newt then wrote a check for $4,000 and purchased 500 shares of ATT stock at $8/share. Of the remaining money in the account, Newt lost $11,000 at the racetrack. The value of IBM stock recently fell to $15/share. The value of ATT stock recently rose to $10/share. Bill has grounds for obtaining a constructive trust. On what cash and/or stock in Newt=s possession can Bill impose constructive trust? Explain your result.
Subquestion B: (6 minutes)
Aeneas is a housepainter. Despite his excellent skill, work has been slow. While traveling down Broadway Street one afternoon, Aeneas noticed a lovely Victorian home that was badly in need of paint. Aeneas attempted to approach the owner, Dido (whom he did not know), about painting her house but Dido was out of the country for several weeks. Sure that Dido would approve, Aeneas proceeded to paint the house its original color. The finished product was excellent and raised the value of the house $5,000 dollars over its previous value. Upon Dido=s return, Aeneas presented her with a bill for $1,000 B the value of his services. Dido refused to pay. Aeneas has approached a lawyer regarding suing Dido for restitution. What will be the measure of Aeneas=s restitutionary recovery?
1
Subquestion C: (18 minutes)
Norm was employed as a dogfood taster by DoggyTreats Inc., a Delaware corporation. Under his employment contract, he received $3000 as a monthly salary, which was the going rate for such a job. On May 31, 1998, DoggyTreats Inc. fired Norm based upon another employee=s false allegation that Norm was stealing money from the corporation. Norm began looking for a new job immediately. Between June 1, 1998 and June 30, 1998, Norm was unable to obtain comparable employment despite his diligent efforts. On July 1, 1998, Norm began a job similar to his old position but because of the black mark on his record, his new employer agreed to pay him only $2000 per month. Norm=s new salary was enough to keep him afloat except for his house payments. In November, because he could not pay his mortgage, the bank instituted foreclosure proceedings and Norm lost his house. It is now November 30, 1998. After a speedy full trial on the merits, a court determined that DoggyTreats Inc. breached its contract of employment with Norm. The court has ordered Norm=s immediate reinstatement at the company (beginning 12/1/98) but is unsure of the measure of Norm=s damages in this case. Advise the court as to (1) the measure of Norm=s contract damages, and (2) whether Norm can recover damages related to the foreclosure on his house.
Subquestion D: deleted
1
Subquestion E: (20 minutes)
On July 1, 1998, Marge and Homer Simpson (Athe Simpsons@) entered into a contract to sell their home to Ned and Maude Flanders (Athe Flanders@). The terms of the written contract held that the Simpsons would transfer title and possession of the house to the Flanders in exchange for $50,000 and a motorboat. The contract also contained a written representation that Aas of the date of transfer, the Simpsons are the only persons with a claim of title in the house.@ The Simpsons were aware that this representation was false because Montgomery Burns (ABurns@) possessed a deed of trust against the property but they deliberately concealed this information from the Flanders. After the parties signed and performed their obligations under the contract, the Flanders moved into the house. The Simpsons took the cash and deposited it in their savings account. They also made several improvements to the motorboat, modifying it so that it could be used as a stunt boat in action films. The modifications to the boat cost $7,000 and added the same to the value of the boat. The Simpsons spent their own money to modify the boat, reserving the $50,000 paid by the Flanders for their children=s college fund.
On September 1, Burns contacted the Flanders and informed them of the outstanding deed of trust against the house. During negotiations regarding how to handle the deed of trust, the Flanders decided to try to rid themselves of the house. While Burns was on vacation in Burma, they listed the house for sale with a real estate agent. They did not disclose that Burns had a deed of trust against the house. The Flanders were unable to sell the house before Burns returned. Upon his return Burns demanded that they honor the deed of trust. The Flanders believe that this whole mess originated with the Simpsons. They have sued the Simpsons for fraud and seek rescission of the agreement between the Simpsons and the Flanders. Will the Flanders be able to obtain rescission of the contract? Assuming that they can, what will be the ultimate disposition of property and/or cash upon rescission?
Subquestion F:(5 minutes)
When an item of real or personal property is damaged courts usually award the plaintiff damages measured by the value of the thing damaged rather than the reasonable replacement cost of the damaged property, even if the value of the property damaged is far less than the cost of replacement. What principle of damages does this rule represent?
END OF EXAMINATION
1