Formal Legal Brief: Gray v. Reynolds - Assignment Example

Comments (0) Cite this document
Gray v. Reynolds Introduction Gray had filed a suit in the competent court of law against Reynolds for breach of contract. Gray executed a contract with Reynolds and Garrison to purchase sawdust at the rate of 50 cents per ton. Just after inking the contract, the counter part of Gray had sold sawdust 6000/- tons at the rate of 1 USD per ton unilaterally without seeking the consent of the other partner of the contract…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER93.7% of users find it useful
Formal Legal Brief: Gray v. Reynolds
Read TextPreview

Extract of sample "Formal Legal Brief: Gray v. Reynolds"

Download file to see previous pages The goods were located in Dallas State at the premises of Reynolds. Gray picked up the sawdust continuously for three weeks. However, he made his last weekly payment on March 16, 1984 to Reynolds. Thereafter, he carried out another transaction in the initial period of April 1984. After mentioned transactions, Reynolds told Gray to unfold his plan regarding picking up the sawdust. If he is not interested to pick up the sawdust due to some reason, then he should negotiate Brown to pick up the remaining sawdust at the rate of USD 1 per ton. On the reluctance of Gray, Reynolds allowed Brown to pick up the stocks of sawdust on April 30, 1984 (See Richard A. Lord, Samuel Williston & West Group, 2007). Issues The petitioner filed the suit against the defendant in the competent court of law to seek legal remedy. On examining the case, the trial court found ample evidence to make up it minds to conclude the case and to announce the judgment. The evidence attached with the case indicates that Gray had to pay the bill of Reynolds on weekly basis after picking up the sawdust but he did not. ...
The court was of the view that in such circumstances court should not enforce the agreement in letter and in spirit if someone fails to perform accordingly (See Richard A. Lord, Samuel Williston & West Group, 2007). While citing the case of Smith v. Clark, the court on the basis of evidence observed that Gray breached the contract. Hence, the decision of the trial court do not consider "clearly erroneous" under Rule 52, A. R. Civ. P (See Samuel Williston & Richard A. Lord, 2008). Analysis On the directives of the trial court the parties involved in this agreement submitted the original transcription of the contract. After examining all the relevant materials, the trial court was of the considered opinion which are as under: a) that Gray had breached the contract by not performing the assigned tasks in terms of goods and payment there against b) It had further breached the contract in connection with the removal and hauling of the sawdust for an unjustified period of time c) it had not abided by the terms of contract if takes into account removing and stockpiling the goods d) hoarded the goods meant for speculation thus failed their commitments with regard to payments on a weekly basis e) that Gray was not entitled to recover since he had failed to perform mutually agreed upon task and put in concerted efforts to mitigate the could be damages (See Richard A. Lord, Samuel Williston & West Group, 2007). In accordance with the trial court, the contract existed between the mentioned stakeholders. Since Gray failed to act according to the terms of contract, therefore, liable to compensate his counterpart, the Reynolds for the damages occurred ...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
(“Formal Legal Brief: Gray v. Reynolds Assignment”, n.d.)
Formal Legal Brief: Gray v. Reynolds Assignment. Retrieved from
(Formal Legal Brief: Gray V. Reynolds Assignment)
Formal Legal Brief: Gray V. Reynolds Assignment.
“Formal Legal Brief: Gray V. Reynolds Assignment”, n.d.
  • Cited: 0 times
Comments (0)
Click to create a comment or rate a document

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Formal Legal Brief: Gray v. Reynolds

Formal Legal Brief on a Tort Law Case

...? Formal legal brief on a Tort law case Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) AC 562 (HL) Facts Mrs. Donogue went into a shop with a friend, and the friend bought Mrs. Donoghue ginger beer. Mrs. Donoghue had no contractual terms with the manufacturer since she did not purchase the beer herself. The ginger beer was in an opaque bottle, which prevented the contents of the bottle from clear sight. Mrs. Donoghue consumed the beer and later the remains of a decomposing snail floated in the glass when she poured the remaining beer into the glass. Because of the contaminated beer and the resulting nauseating sight, Mrs. Donoghue suffered severe gastroenteritis, shock, as a result, Mrs....
4 Pages(1000 words)Essay

NewCorp Scenarios Legal Brief

...? NewCorp Legal Scenarios NewCorp Legal Scenarios After Pat’s employment in NewCorp, he was compelled to offer satisfactory performance. This includes execution of his management functions and all the delegated duties. However, after moving to another town, it is evidently seen that his performance dropped. This was an indication that he was not performing to his best as it concerns his management duties. When an employee moves to a far place, he or she is affected as he or she is destabilized. He has to get some time to establish himself or herself at the new place before he or she can spring back to success. However, this is not outlined in the employment documents (Lambert, 2005). Therefore, this gave...
4 Pages(1000 words)Research Paper

Legal Brief

...Case Brief Clever v. Cherry Hill Board of Education, 838 F. Supp. 929 (D.N.J. 1993). Issues The main issue in the Clever v Cherry Hill Board of Education is whether or not a New Jerssey public school educational policy offended the Establishment Clause contained in the both the US and New Jersey Constitution. (Clever v Cherry Hill Board of Education, 1993) The school’s educational policy encouraged student awareness of diverse cultural, ethnic and religious themes. (Clever v Cherry Hill Board of Education, 1993) The establisment clause contained in the First Amendment to the US Constitution provides that Congress shall not make laws that respect any...
4 Pages(1000 words)Essay

Formal legal brief

...Formal Legal Brief Citation Washington, et al., v. Harold Glucksberg et al., No. 96-110, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 521 U.S 702; 117 S. Ct. 2258; 117 S. Ct. 2302; 138 L. Ed. 2d 772; 1997 U.S LEXIS 4039; 65 U.S.L.W. 4669; 97 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5008; 97 Daily Journal DAR 8150; 11 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 190, January 8, 1997 Argued, June 26, 1997, Decided Facts According to a Washington state statute enacted in 1975, a person who aids another person to attempt suicide is guilty. In 1994, some physicians and some individuals with painful terminal illnesses brought this matter to the District Court of Western District of Washington. Their demand was that the...
3 Pages(750 words)Essay

Legal Brief

... Legal Brief 28 September US V Pheaster 544 F.2d 353 (1976) Nos. 75-1004 and 74-3308 United s Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit, August 19, 1976. Citation of the Case: US Vs Pheaster 544 F.2d 353 (1976) Nos. 75-1004 and 74-3308 United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit, August 19, 1976  Parties: Plaintiff- United States of America. Defendant- Pheaster. Facts: Larry Adell was a boy aged round 16 years, who vanished after an intended meeting with Mr. Angelo in the parking lot of an eating place. Allegedly, after the meeting, Larry Adell never went back from site. Subsequently boy’s father received a call from an unknown man, confirming that the boy was kidnapped and he was in his custody. The abductor demanded ransom $400,000... was to...
2 Pages(500 words)Essay

Legal Brief

...Legal Brief A case between Craig E. Kleffman and Vonage holding was held on June 21, at the supreme court of California. This case was cited as Kleffman V. Vonage Holdings Corp., 232 P. 3d 625, where 232 represent the volume, 3d represent the third series and 625 represents the page number. In the case, Craig E. Kleffman was the plaintiff while Vonage holding corp., was the defendant. This case is a litigation civil case under section 17529.5, section (a) (2) of the company and Professions Code which states that, it is against the law to advertise via commercial emails, also known as spam, whose content are untrue, misrepresented, or copied header information. The verdict in this case,...
2 Pages(500 words)Case Study

Legal Brief

...Case Brief: Sony Corporation of America Et Al. v. Universal Studios, Inc., Et Al. 464 U.S. 417 (1984 Facts The case raises the question whether a company is liable for contributory copyright infringement in case the company manufactures technical devices which can be used to copy copyrighted content. Sony Corp. developed a video tape recording device known as “Betamax”. Walt Disney Company and Universal Studios understood that there could be a threat to their business and opted to file a suit against Sony Corp. for contributory copyright infringement and unfair completion under the Lamham Act. The case moved from the District Court, which ruled in favor of Sony to Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit,...
2 Pages(500 words)Assignment

Legal Brief

...Task Case Brief and Citation The case is of New York Times Co. Vs. Sullivan- 376 U.S 254 (1964), a case of the UnitedStates Supreme Court ( 2. Facts of the Case This is the case that defined the standard of actual malice and the level of speech freedom with regard to public figures (Rolph, David &Kirby, 1). According to the United States Supreme Court a public figure cannot be held in libel unless proofs of malice can be evidenced. The case is of New York Times a newspaper company that was sued by L. B Sullivan, a Montgomery Public Safety Commissioner for defamation due to an advertisement titled ‘Heed Their Rising Voices’ ( Sullivan accused the New York Times; of falsely accusing he of arresting...
2 Pages(500 words)Assignment

Criminal Law Formal Legal Brief

...Case and Citation Florence v Board Of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington, 566 U.S._ Albert Florence was the plaintiff in this case against the county of Burlington. Facts Albert Florence was kept in jail for seven days because he had been arrested on a warrant for a traffic violation that he had already paid. He was subjected to being searched two times which made him file a lawsuit against the officials at the two jails. Florence argued that the searches at the jailhouse were unreasonable because he had been arrested for failing to pay a fine which is not punishable in New Jersey. Procedural History The US District Court under Judge Joseph H. Rodriguez concluded that Florence has been subjected to an...
3 Pages(750 words)Case Study

HS 320 Legal Brief: Brown v. Board of Education

...HS 320 Legal Brief: Brown v. Board of Education Case Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka 347 U.S. 483 (1954) FactsThe cases from state of Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware are on segregation of white and Negro children in public schools. Segregation based on race denied the Negro children equal protection of the laws with the white children even though other facilities and factors are equal. The legal representatives of the minors of Negro race seek to be admitted in the public schools without segregation at any instance. They were denied admission to schools attended by white children under permitting laws of segregation according to race...
1 Pages(250 words)Assignment
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

Let us find you another Assignment on topic Formal Legal Brief: Gray v. Reynolds for FREE!

Contact Us