B HW 3 - B law hw 1 PDF

Preview

Summary

B law hw 1...

Description

Jessica Tietjen Prof. F. Lord, Esq. Business Law EVERETT V. MITCHELL Rosemary Mitchell and Al Mitchell are owners of a secondhand store. They attended Alexander's auction on August 12, 1978. Frequently, they bought merchandise at auctions for their business. For fifty dollars they bought a used safe. At the auction the auctioneer informed them that the safe had no key and was locked. It was part of an estate from the Sumstads. The Mitchells proceeded to take the safe to a locksmith to open the safe. Thirty two thousand two hundred seven dollars in cash was found inside the safe when it was opened. The City of Everett Police were called by the locksmith. The money was impounded by the police. An interpleader action was taken by the City of Everett and against the Mitchells and the Sumstad Eastate. The courts judgement was in the Sumstad Estates favor. An appeal by the Mitchells took place, and the Supreme Court ruled that the Mitchells could keep the money.

Facts 

Al and Rosemary Mitchell own a secondhand store.



Al and Rosemary Mitchell attended an auction to buy products for their business.



They purchased a safe that was locked without a key for fifty dollars.



The safe was a component of the Sumstad estate.



Al and Rosemary Mitchell brought the safe to a locksmith to open it.



An amount of $32,207 was discovered inside the safe.



The City of Everett Police was notified by the locksmith.



The Police impounded the money.



An interpleader action against the Estate and the Mitchells was taken.



The Mitchells were denied attorney fees.



Judgement in favor of the Estate occurred.



An appeal took place by the Mitchells.



The Mitchells won and were allowed to keep the $32,207.

Issues



Do you believe the court awarded the money to the right party.



Were the Mitchells to lawyer fees, since they had to answer to the interpleader action.



Did the buyer and the seller have a contract for the safe.

Decision The courts awarded the money originally to the Sumstad Estate. After an appeal, the Supreme Court agreed that a contract was created between the Mitchells and the auctioneer and awarded the money to the Mitchells. The objective theory of contracts helped the Mitchells win and receive the $32,207.

Opinion In my opinion, the Supreme Court made the right decision since a contract was formed selling the safe to the Mitchells. THe auctioneer meant to sell the safe and its contents. Both parties entered into the sale knowingly that the sale was final. The auctioneer did not state that he had any rights to the contents of the safe. Because of these findings, I believe the Mitchells are entitled to receive the $32,207....