This is the second of two podcasts by Professor Jennifer S. Martin that describe the process by which a creditor identifies collateral subject to a security interest under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. This podcast focuses primarily on descriptions of intangible personal property, including the descriptions used in a security agreement. See Classification […]
Entries Tagged as 'Lawdibles Audio'
Classification of Collateral II: Discussions in Secured Transactions
April 12th, 2021 · Comments Off on Classification of Collateral II: Discussions in Secured Transactions · Lawdibles Audio, Secured Transactions
Tags:classification of collateral·collateral·intangible personal property·intangible property·quasi intangible property·security agreement·security interest
Classification of Collateral I: Discussions in Secured Transactions
April 6th, 2021 · Comments Off on Classification of Collateral I: Discussions in Secured Transactions · Lawdibles Audio, Secured Transactions
This is the first of two podcasts by Professor Jennifer S. Martin that describe the process by which a creditor identifies collateral subject to a security interest under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. This podcast focuses primarily on descriptions of tangible personal property, including the descriptions used in a security agreement. See Classification […]
Tags:classification of collateral·collateral·security agreement·security interest·tangible personal property
Implied Conditions: Discussions in Contracts
March 25th, 2021 · Comments Off on Implied Conditions: Discussions in Contracts · Contracts, Lawdibles Audio
The topic of this podcast by Professor Scott J. Burnham is when a court will supply a condition even where the parties have not expressly written one into the contract. It distinguishes between a promise and a condition under Restatement (Second) of Contracts §§ 2 and 224. This podcast references two other podcasts: Express Conditions and […]
Tags:excuse of conditions·express conditions·implied conditions·promissory condition·Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 2·Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 224·rule of constructive conditions of exchange·substantial performance
Excuse of Conditions: Discussions in Contracts
March 16th, 2021 · Comments Off on Excuse of Conditions: Discussions in Contracts · Contracts, Lawdibles Audio
The topic of this podcast by Professor Scott J. Burnham is when a court will excuse satisfaction of a condition to avoid the harsh effects of forfeiture when a condition fails. It also looks at what happens when a court has determined that there is a condition and the failure of the condition might cause […]
Tags:§ 229·Clark v. West Publishing Company·conditions·divisible contract·excuse·excuse of condition·express conditions·implied conditions·restitution·waiver·West Publishing Company
Express Conditions: Discussions in Contracts
March 9th, 2021 · Comments Off on Express Conditions: Discussions in Contracts · Contracts, Lawdibles Audio
The topic of this podcast by Professor Scott J. Burnham is when language in a contract is an express condition, such that failure to satisfy the condition results in a performance not being due. A condition can be a good way to hedge in case a party is concerned that it can’t meet its commitments […]
Tags:Clark·Clark v. West Publishing Company·excuse of conditions·express conditions·implied conditions·Parol Evidence·West Publishing Company
Mitigation: Discussions in Contracts
March 2nd, 2021 · Comments Off on Mitigation: Discussions in Contracts · Contracts, Lawdibles Audio
This podcast by Professor Scott J. Burnham explores the basic concept of mitigation, or, as it is sometimes called, avoidable consequences, which is used in computing damages. Mitigation is a principle that can limit a plaintiff’s recovery in a claim for breach of contract. The principle is stated in Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 350(1). The […]
Tags:§ 2-704·§ 350(1)·avoidable consequences·Luten Bridge Co·mitigation·Rockingham County·Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co.
Tortious Interference: Discussions in Torts
February 22nd, 2021 · Comments Off on Tortious Interference: Discussions in Torts · Lawdibles Audio, Torts
The topic of this podcast by Professor Scott J. Burnham is Tortious Interference – when one of the parties to a contract claims that a third party wrongfully interfered with the contract by inducing the other party to breach. The rule for when tortious interference arises after a contract can be found in Restatement (Second) […]
Tags:§ 766·§ 767·Inc·Inc. v. Pennzoil Co·MEA·Pennzoil Co·Phillips·Phillips v. MEA·Texaco·The Insider·tortious interference
Certainty: Discussions in Contracts
February 17th, 2021 · Comments Off on Certainty: Discussions in Contracts · Contracts, Lawdibles Audio
The topic of this podcast by Professor Scott J. Burnham is the basic concept of certainty in computing damages. Certainty is a principle that can limit a plaintiff’s recovery in a claim for breach of contract. According to Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 352, “Damages are not recoverable for loss beyond an amount that the evidence […]
Tags:§ 352·certainty·Freund·lost royalties·new business·reasonable certainty·Washington Square Press
Foreseeability: Discussions in Contracts
February 9th, 2021 · Comments Off on Foreseeability: Discussions in Contracts · Contracts, Lawdibles Audio
The topic of this podcast by Professor Scott J. Burnham is when consequential damages can be recovered for breach of contract because they are foreseeable. The podcast examines the rules established in Hadley v. Baxendale to determine if a loss is foreseeable and therefore recoverable as a consequential damage, as well as some practical effects of those […]
Tags:§ 2-714(3)·§ 2-719(3)·actual knowledge·Baxendale·consequential damages·foreseeability·foreseeable·Hadley·Hadley v. Baxendale·imputed knowledge
Reliance (Promissory Estoppel): Discussions in Contracts
February 2nd, 2021 · Comments Off on Reliance (Promissory Estoppel): Discussions in Contracts · Contracts, Lawdibles Audio
The topic of this podcast by Professor Jennifer S. Martin is when agreements that are not enforceable as contracts because they are not supported by consideration are nevertheless enforceable due to reliance on the promise, often referred to as promissory estoppel. It discusses reliance as it pertains to gift promises, including charitable donations. The podcast […]
Tags:§ 90·Bouton·Byers·gift promise·Kirksey·promissory estoppel·reliance·Ricketts·Scothorn