100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Pla 3014 final test 1 questions & answers 2024/2025 $7.99
Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Pla 3014
  4.  
  5. Pla 3014

Exam (elaborations)

Pla 3014 final test 1 questions & answers 2024/2025
 0 purchase
  • Course
  • Pla 3014
  • Institution
  • Pla 3014

Pla 3014 final test 1 questions & answers 2024/2025 Lucy vs. Zehmer (property contract case) - ANSWERSthe complainants are entitled to have specific performance of the contract sued on (reverse and remanded) Hanks vs. McNeil (insane man sold coal company case) - ANSWERSthere is no basis for...

[Show more]

Preview 2 out of 6  pages

Document information

  • August 16, 2024
  • 6
  • 2024/2025
  • Exam (elaborations)
  • Questions & answers

Subjects

  • pla 3014 final test 1 questions answers 2024202

Written for

  • Pla 3014
  • Pla 3014

Seller

avatar-seller
Bensuda

Reviews received

Content preview

Pla 3014 final test 1 questions &
answers 2024/2025

Lucy vs. Zehmer (property contract case) - ANSWERSthe complainants are entitled to have specific
performance of the contract sued on (reverse and remanded)



Hanks vs. McNeil (insane man sold coal company case) - ANSWERSthere is no basis for holding voidable
his sale here involved on the ground of his insanity



Stambovsky vs. Ackley - ANSWERSthe unusual facts of this case do disclose by vend, clearly warrant
grant of equitable relief to the buyer



Tierney vs. four H land company limited partnership - ANSWERSspecific performance was an appropriate
remedy for four h and western breach, and district court should have ordered it. Judgment was reversed
and remanded to have four h and western comply with contract



Hoffman vs. red owl stores - ANSWERSwe conclude that injustice would here if plaintiffs were not
granted relief because of failure of defendants to keep their promises which induced plaintiffs to act to
their determined



star valley ranch vs. Daley (home development case) - ANSWERSthe district court did not err in holding
that the amended covenants were invalid as they pertained to plats 1,2, and 3, of the star valley
subdivision



cnx vs. rasnake (deed case) - ANSWERSwe adopt that interpretation and hold that the circuit court erred
in construing the disputed language to constitute an unambiguous exception of all coal and other
minerals from the conveyance



Niesche vs. Wilkinson (Mary Lou and Robert fox died property case) - ANSWERScircuit court did not err
in ruling that Mary Lou had no ownership interest in the 960 acres

, kelo vs. Connecticut (eminent domain case) - ANSWERSbecause the plan unquestionably serves a public
purpose the takings challenged here satisfy the public use requirement of the 5th amendment



Martin vs. Bicknell (shared driveway case) - ANSWERSwe hold that the trial court erred in granting the
motion to dismiss (the martin's use of the driveway with Bicknell's was entirely consistent with an not
legitimate basis to dismiss their claim of prescriptive easement)



Cohen vs. bayside federal savings and loan (ring ($100) and auto accident case) - ANSWERScourt decided
carol should keep the ring because that result is equitable and because justice so requires



Lowe vs. Quinn (ring ($60000) married guy case) - ANSWERSbased on such reasoning the few courts
which have had occasion t consider the question he held that a plaintiff may not recover the
engagement ring or any other property he may have given the woman



executory contract - ANSWERScontract that has not yet been fully performed



executed contract - ANSWERS1 that has been fully performed



definition of contract - ANSWERStotal legal obligations which results from parties agreement as affected
by this act and any other applicable rule of law



elements of an offer - ANSWERS1. intent to make an offer on the part of the offeror

2. definite terms

3. communication to the offeree



offeror - ANSWERSparty making offer



offeree - ANSWERSparty accepting offer



elements of acceptance - ANSWERS1. communication to offeror

2. acceptance of the terms of offer

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Bensuda. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $7.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

69052 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 15 years now

Start selling
$7.99
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added