Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Law Student Gives Up

So Big N is cracking up. As evidence of this, please view the answer to her Contracts II homework for tomorrow. I have included the questions for your reading pleasure.

Question 16.1.a.

Your law firm has a new client, Pierre La Clede, who owns an art and framing gallery in the trendy part of town. As the firm's UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) expert, you end up getting to counsel Pierre. He first confides to you that he really dislikes lawyers, but his show has been having so many problems with title issues lately that he had no choice but to seek legal advice in order to sort things out. The first situation Pierre asks you about involves his gallery's recent sale of a $70,000 abstract painting entitled "Pain." The painting was purchased by a man who identified himself only as "the Critic" and who paid for Pain with a suitcase containing 700 $100 bills. the problem is, the bills turned out to be counterfeit and "the Critic" is nowhere to be found. Pierre did, however, discover "Pain" at Lucy's, a competing gallery down the street. Lucy Fenton, the owner of that gallery, said that she had purchased the painting for $20,000 from a stranger who called himself "the Critic." Pierre wants to know whether he should be able to recover the painting from Lucy's. What do you advise? See U.C.C

sections 2-403(1), 1-201(9), 2-103(1)(b), 1-204 amended

Answer 16.1a: Like the rolex (I refuse to capitalize rolex) case, did this other art gallery owner know that the price was way below what it should have been?
Was she a good faith purchaser? It seems that the og (original gangsta) gallery owner has a case against the other gallery owner.


Question 16.2.a. Pierre's next question deals with a $40,000 painting (with frame) entitled "Peace." Pierre had bought and then custom framed that painting himself, and Lucy from down the street had asked Pierre to bring Peace by her shop so that she could look at the fram job. Pierre did as Lucy requested, but later that same day one of Lucy's clerks mistakenly sold "Peace" to Frank Baebler, a new customer, for just $30,000 (reflecting Lucy's customary 25 percent "new customer" discount). Frank paid for the painting with a personal check that was later returned for insufficient funds, but he said that this was just an oversight and the he would be happy to make good on that check with a $30,000 cashier's check. Before Frank makes good on that check, however, Pierre discovers the problem and demands that Frank return the painting. Should Pierre be able to get it? U.C.C. 2-403(1), 2-403(2), 2-403(3), 1-201(9), and 1-204amended.

Answer 16.2.a.: 16.2a: Hell yes, no one has been paid, no money has been exchanged and the other gallery owner should fire that stupid clerk.

Question 16.2.b Same facts as part a., except Frank quickly gives Lucy the cashier's check for $30,000 after Pierre demands the painting back but before Pierre actually takes the painting from Frank. Should Pierre be able to get it back? UCC 2-403

Answer 16.2.b: Oh hell yes. If Lucy knows, then she never should have accepted the check. Whatever happened to honesty, decency, common fucking sense? Even Stevens even?

Question 16.2.c: Same facts as part a., except Frank quickly gives Lucy the cashier's check for $30,000 before Pierre even demands the painting from him. Now should Pierre be able to retrieve the painting from frank? UCC 2-403

Answer 16.2c: Does Lucy not remember Frank lending the painting to her? Is this the 80s? Is everyone on cocaine?

Qustion 16.2.d: Same facts as part a., except Frank never gives Lucy a bad check but instead a cashier's check from the beginning. Now should Pierre be able to retrieve the painting from Frank? UCC 2-403

Answer 16.2d: I honestly don’t know. Maybe Pierre could take Frank out for some wining, dining . . . Maybe finesse the painting out of his possession. (I figure if it’s the 80s, they’re guys, they’re coked up, and they’re into art they must be fruity tooties.)

Question 16.2.d: Same facts as part a. What rights does Pierre have against Lucy assuming that Pierre cannot recover the painting from Frank? UCC 1-103

Answer 16.2e: I have no idea.
__________________
My sentiments exactly!






Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home