1. 3/17.2006Class 301 Class 30, Friday, March 17 Post-spring break assignments Tuesdaydiscuss Essay Midterm; discuss Spring Break 2006 Practice Multiple Choice (posted on course web page) Thursday543-64 Fridayno class; Cesar Chavez Day Observed Reminder: Multiple Choice Midterm on Saturday, April 8, at 10am. It will count 20% of your final grade. Today’s agenda Hauer v. Union State Bank of Wautoma Totem Marine v. Alyeska Pipeline Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School District

2. 3/17.2006Class 302 At last, spring break.

3. 3/17.2006Class 303 Final Exam Final Exam: The final exam on May 15 will constitute 70% of your final grade. On the final exam, the Multiple Choice portion will be weighted 25/70 of the final exam; the essay portion will be weighted at 45/70. A different way to look at it: Essay Midterm10% MC Midterm20% MC Final25% Essay Final45% OverallMC45% Essay55%

4. 3/17.2006Class 304 Hauer v. Union State Bank of Wautoma Court of Appeals of Wisconsin 912 Wis. 2d 576, 532 N.W.2d 456 (1995)

5. 3/17.2006Class 305 Who is suing whom? For what kind of damages? What is the subject matter of the transaction? What is the legal basis for the claim? What is the duty that P is claiming that D breached?

6. 3/17.2006Class 306 What is the factual basis for the claim? Arguments/defenses? Who won at the trial court level? This appeal?

7. 3/17.2006Class 307 Issue? Authorities/Rule? Application to facts in case? What policies does it further/ignore?

8. 3/17.2006Class 308 Is mental incapacity just a defense to enforcement of a contract?

9. 3/17.2006Class 309 Aside from the status that is protected (age versus mental capacity), what is the major difference between the two doctrines? What justifies this difference?

10. 3/17.2006Class 3010 Restatement 15 (1)(a) cognitive (1)(b) volitional what are the key differences between the requirements to establish mental incapacity under (1)(a) versus (1)(b)?

11. 3/17.2006Class 3011 Totem Marine Barge & Tug v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. Supreme Court of Alaska 584 P.2d 15 (1978)

12. 3/17.2006Class 3012 Who is suing whom? For what kind of damages? What is the subject matter of the transaction? What is the legal basis for the claim? What is the duty that P is claiming that D breached?

13. 3/17.2006Class 3013 What is the factual basis for the claim? Arguments/defenses? Who won at the trial court level? This appeal?

14. 3/17.2006Class 3014 Issue? Authorities/Rule? Application to facts in case? What policies does it further/ignore?

15. 3/17.2006Class 3015 What’s the typical situation where duress is alleged?

16. 3/17.2006Class 3016 another common situation where duress is asserted K modifications duress here is asserted to rescind or “undo” a modification that is agreed upon to an already existing K e.g., Austin Instruments v. Loral

17. 3/17.2006Class 3017 Duress elements

18. 3/17.2006Class 3018 element 1 When is a threat wrongful or improper?

19. 3/17.2006Class 3019 element 2 How do you decide if a person had no reasonable alternative than to say yes?

20. 3/17.2006Class 3020 element 3 How do you establish that the wrongful threat induced assent?

21. 3/17.2006Class 3021 quasi-element in some jurisdictions protest by threatened party

22. 3/17.2006Class 3022 Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School District California District Court of Appeals 246 Cal. App. 2d 123, 54 Cal. Rptr. 533 (1966)

23. 3/17.2006Class 3023 Who is suing whom? For what kind of damages? What is the subject matter of the transaction? What is the legal basis for the claim? What is the duty that P is claiming that D breached?

24. 3/17.2006Class 3024 What is the factual basis for the claim? Arguments/defenses? Who won at the trial court level? This appeal?

25. 3/17.2006Class 3025 Issue? Authorities/Rule? Application to facts in case? What policies does it further/ignore?

26. 3/17.2006Class 3026 Undue influence elements

27. 3/17.2006Class 3027 Factors

28. 3/17.2006Class 3028 Factors of overpersuasion 1. discussion of the transaction at an unusual or inappropriate time; 2. consummation of the transaction in an unusual place; 3. insistent demand that business be finished at once; 4. extreme emphasis on untoward consequences of delay; 5. the use of multiple persuaders by the dominant side against a single servient party; 6. absence of third party advisers to the servient party; 7. statements that there is no time to consult financial advisers or attorneys

29. 3/17.2006Class 3029 Not quite a pop quiz A Walt Disney Co. official visited Robert Jahn, a Disney executive who was in the hospital with advanced stage AIDS and obtained the dying man’s signature on a waiver of $2 million in life insurance, stock options, bonuses, and deferred compensation. Jahn was alleged to have received kickbacks from Disney’s suppliers. The meeting took place at the hospital without witnesses; Jahn did not have the benefit of consultations with his attorney or other advisors; Disney and MetLife stood to save more than $2 million if Jahn could be persuaded to execute the release before he died; the Disney official admits that the release contained a waiver of life insurance benefits which had not been included in an earlier draft; Disney knew that Jahn was desperate to avoid public disclosure of his alleged receipt of kickbacks from the company's suppliers.

30. 3/17.2006Class 3030 End of Class Tuesdaydiscuss Essay Midterm; discuss Practice Multiple Choice Thursday543-64 Fridayno class; Cesar Chavez Day