ContractsProf Blog

Editor: D. A. Jeremy Telman
Valparaiso Univ. Law School

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Kansas Makes 25 (and Counting)

With a stroke (well, perhaps a few strokes) of her pen this past Monday, Governor Kathleen Sibelius made Kansas the 25th state to have enacted a version of Revised Article 1.  Like the versions of Revised Article 1 already in force in 22 states and the two enacted earlier this year in Utah and North Dakota, which will take effect on April 30 and August 1, respectively, Kansas SB 183 rejects "uniform" R1-301 for a choice of law provision similar to the one in pre-Revised 1-105.  (Kansas SB 183 will take effect on July 1, 2008.)  Kansas becomes the eighteenth state to enact uniform R1-201(b)(20)'s unitary good faith standard.

Indiana SB 419 awaits only gubernatorial action (or the running of time for a gubernatorial veto) before it becomes the 26th enactment.  Like Kansas SB 183, Indiana SB 419 rejects uniform R1-301 in favor of retaining the essence of pre-Revised 1-105.  Unlike Kansas SB 183, Indiana SB 419 also rejects uniform R1-201(b)(20) in favor of retaining the bifurcated good faith standard of pre-Revised 1-201(19) and 2-103(1)(b).  If enacted, Indiana SB 419 would take effect on July 1, 2007.

[Keith A. Rowley]

April 14, 2007 in Legislation | Permalink | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Two McDonald's Deals

PrcmcdonaldsThe New York Times reports that McDonald's, following Wal-Mart's lead, is going to allow the formation of unions at its more than 750 outlets in the People's Republic of China. 

In the same article referenced above, The New York Times reports that McDonald's has agreeed to pay an additional penny-per-pound for the Florida-grown tomatoes that adorn your Big Mac. This is pursuant to an agreement negotiated between McDonald's and the Coalition of Immokalee Workers.  The deal was negotiated at the Carter Center in Atlanta and is expected to increase farm workers' pay from 40 cents to 72 cents per 32-pound bucket of tomatoes.

[Jeremy Telman]

April 10, 2007 in In the News | Permalink | TrackBack (0)

Monday, April 9, 2007

Coach's Contracts

With all of the college basketball changes the past few weeks, it is worth looking again at what the coaches contract for with their colleges.

College football coaches contracts are treated in depth here:

USA Today

Basketball coaches here:

USA Today

Plenty of interesting features in these contracts besides the money.

[Stephen Safranek]

April 9, 2007 in Celebrity Contracts | Permalink | TrackBack (0)

Yo, Taxi!

Because it's Monday, we could all use a little contracts-related frivolity.  Here's an excerpt from this story about a NYC couple who hailed a cab (formed a contract) to get to Arizona:

Betty and Bob Matas have retired and are moving to Arizona, but like many New Yorkers they don't drive, and they don't want their cats to travel all that way in an airliner cargo hold.

Their solution: "Hey, cabbie."

They met taxi driver Douglas Guldeniz when they hailed his cab after a shopping trip several weeks ago.

They got to talking about their upcoming move, and "we said 'Do you want to come?'" said Bob Matas, 72, a former audio and video engineer for advertising agencies. "And he said 'Sure.'"

It was initially a gag, Matas said, but as they talked over the ensuing weeks it became reality.

They plan to leave Tuesday on the 2,400-mile trip to Sedona, Ariz., with Guldeniz driving his yellow SUV cab 10 hours a day for a flat fee of $3,000, plus gas, meals and lodging.

They're getting a break. The standard, metered fare would be about $5,000 — each way, according to David Pollack, executive director of the Committee for Taxi Safety, a drivers' group. But city Taxi and Limousine Commission rules direct drivers and passengers to negotiate a flat fare for trips outside the city and a few suburban areas.

[Miriam A. Cherry]

April 9, 2007 in In the News | Permalink | TrackBack (0)

Limerick of the Week

In a recent post, I complained about the difficulty of rhyming estoppel.  To my surprise, nobody wrote in to offer suggestions.  Very disappointing.  So this is what I'm left with:

Alaska Democrats v. Rice

This just in from our anchor, Ted Koppel:
The Statute of Frauds may just topple!
Politicians are snarky,
And yet their malarchy
Is binding if backed by estoppel.

Todd van Poppel is in the on-deck circle.  Be thee warned!!

[Jeremy Telman]

April 9, 2007 in Famous Cases, Limericks, Teaching | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)