|E-mail the prof
E-mail the class
(Last updated: 11/30/2001 05:08 PM)
Reading assignments for week of December 3 (Posted 11/30/01).
On Tuesday, December 3, we will discuss money damage for breach of warranty. You should read [or reread] pp. 597-617; we will focus in discussion on problems 11-3 through 11-5, and on Delano Growers. This will be a short class since we will leave the last 15 minutes for you to fill out course evaluations..
On Thursday, December 5, the last day of class, we will discuss limitation of remedies under 2-719. You should read pp. 640-653; class discussion will focus on problem 12-2 and on Cayuga Harvester v. Allis-Chalmers.
The final exam may be picked up beginning Wednesday, December 12. Administrative details are available on the exam page. I will hold extended office hours most of the day on Tuesday the 11th. You are also encouraged to use e-mail for review questions.
Reading assignments for week of November 26 (Posted 11/23/01).
On Tuesday, November 27, we will finish discussing acceptance and revocation, focusing on problem 6-6 and on Johannsen v. Minnesota Valley Tractor Co, both of which were assigned for last week's reading. We will not discuss problem 6-7; instead, you may find it a useful review exercise. Then we will turn to the topics of insecurity and repudiation. You should read pp. 505-518; we will focus in discussion on problems 10-1 and 10-3.
On Thursday, November 29, we will discuss money damage for breach of warranty. You should read pp. 597-617; we will focus in discussion on problems 11-3 through 11-5, and on Delano Growers. I will also provide a handout that summarizes and compares the other money damage provisions of Article 2 and the CISG.
Reading assignments for week of November 19 (Posted 11/16/01).
On Monday the 19th we will have a second make-up class in room JG501, from 6 - 7:30 pm [not 6:30 till 8 as previously posted]. We will finish discussing warranty disclaimers, focusing on Martin v. Joseph Harris. Then we will go onto the interelated topics of rejection, acceptance, and cure. You should read pp. 325-338 and skim pp. 347-355. Our discussion will focus on problem 6-4 and on TW Oil v. Consolidated Edison.
On Tuesday, November 20, we will discuss the Article 2 provisions dealing with acceptance of goods (2-606 and 607) and revocation of acceptance (2-608). You should read pp. 355378, focusing on problems 66 and 67.
Reading assignments for week of November 12 (Posted 11/09/01).
On Tuesday, November 13, we will discuss Keith v. Buchanan, and then move onto the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness, where you should read pp. 240-264. We will focus in class discussion on Delano Growers and Lewis v. Mobil Oil. The key statutory provisions are 2-314 and 2-315.
On Thursday, November 15, after completing leftover material, we will discuss the provisions for disclaiming warranties (2-316). You should read pp. 273-281, focusing on Martin v. Joseph Harris. If we have time, we will begin discussing limiting remedies under 2-719; the relevant reading here is pp. 304-314, focusing on problems 5-5 and 5-6.
Reading assignments for week of November 5 (Posted 11/02/01).
On Tuesday, November 6, after finishing leftover material, we will take up the topic of contract modification. The key statutory section is 2-209. You should read pp. 410-421, focusing on Roth Steel Products v. Sharon Steel and on problem 75. [Note that this problem is based on the Wisconsin Knife case, which is discussed in the succeeding BMC Industries case.]
On Thursday, November 8, we will begin our discussion of warranties. You should read pp. 205-234, and should look at 9-313, 314, and 315. The focus will be on problem 51, which reviews all the warranty provisions, and Keith v. Buchanan, which applies 9-313. If there is time, we will also discuss Rogath v. Siebenmann.
A tentative schedule for the rest of the term may be found on the syllabus page of this website.
Reading assignments for week of October 29 (Posted 10/26/01).
The midterm exam is scheduled for Friday, November 2, between 11 am and 3 pm, location to be announced. It will cover material up through the open terms [9-305 and 9-306, et seq.] For details on the format and for copies of some old exams, see the exam page on this website. I will be available for extra consultation on Tuesday afternoon, in addition to my regular office hours on Thursday afternoon.
On Tuesday, October 30, we will discuss risk allocation and risk of loss, focusing on 2-509 and 2-510. The assigned readings are pp. 423-435; in class discussion, we will focus on problems 81 and 82, and on Judge Posner's opinion in Jason's Foods v. Eckrich.
On Thursday, November 1st, we will we will move on to the topic of excuse, where the key statutory sections are 2-613 and 2-615. You should read pp. 379-396. In class discussion we will briefly discuss problem 71, and then split the balance of the time between the Wickliffe Farms and Specialty Tires cases.
Reading assignments for week of October 22 (Posted 10/21/01).
On Tuesday, October 23, we will discuss the issue of open-ended contract terms, beginning with section 2-306 on open quantity terms. You should read pp. 174-190, focusing on problem 4-3 and on Orange & Rockland v. Amerada Hess. To the extent there is time, we will begin discussing 2-305 on open price terms. Here you should read pp. 191-192.
On Thursday the 25th, we will complete our discussion of 2-305; you should read 193-203, treating the TCP v. Uniroyal case as background reading that we will not discuss in detail. Our focus will be on the problems. Then, we will go out of order in the casebook in order to take up the topic of risk of loss (2-509 and 510). The detour is because issues of risk allocation underlie many of the doctrines we will study in the later part of the course, and the risk of loss materials present these issues in a basic and relatively straightforward context. Relevant pages here are 423-435. In class discussion, we will focus on problems 81 and 82, and on Judge Posner's opinion in Jason's Foods v. Eckrich.
Reading assignments for week of October 15 (Posted 10/12/01).
On Monday, October 15, at our 6:30 makeup class, we will discuss the Statute of Frauds, §2-201. You should read pp. 131-150, along with 2-201 itself. (You may also find it useful to compare 2-201 with its Article 2A counterpart, 2A-201.) In class discussion we will focus on problems 3-9 and 3-10. In studying these problems, you should consider how you would proceed as a matter of litigation tactics in order to make use of the exception found in subsection 3(b). You should also consider the question of whether and how you would do business differently under the CISG, which does not have a Statute of Frauds at all.
On Tuesday, October 16, we will meet at our regular time. The topic will be the UCC parol evidence rule, found in §-202. You should read pp. 151-160 and 166-174. In discussing 2-202, we will focus on Columbia Nitrogen v. Royster; to analyze this case fully, you will also need to look at sections 1-205 and 2-208. Finally, you should take a look at the one-page excerpt from Southern Concrete v. Mableton Contractors [in the course supplement] and consider whether the view of trade usage expressed in that case undercuts the logic of the Columbia Nitrogen case.
On Thursday the 18th, after finishing leftover material, we will take up the CISG's approach to trade usage, course of dealing, and parol evidence, as embodied in Articles 8 and 9. In this regard, you should read and be prepared to discuss Beijing Metals and Minerals v. American Business Center [in the supplement]. As you will see, this case provides an object lesson in how not to interpret the CISG and UCC. We will discuss why, but we will also discuss whether the ultimate result can be justified either on textual or policy grounds.
Reading assignments for week of October 8 (Posted 10/05/01).
On Tuesday, October 9, we will finish continue discussing basic concepts of contract formation under article 2, and then turn to similar problems under the CISG. You should read pp. 112-121. along with the case of Filanto v Chilewich, found in the supplemental coursepack. Our discussion will consider how Filanto would have come out under Article 2 as well as whether it is rightly decided under the CISG. We will then begin talking about planning and policy issues in the form-contract setting, a discussion that will carry over till Thursday..
On Thursday the 11th, after finishing the battle of the forms, we will take up 2-201, the Article 2 Statute of Frauds (529-548). You should read pp. 131-150. In class discussion we will focus on problems 37 (which implicates some interesting policy and planning issues), and 3-9 and 3-10 (which are more straightforward and provide material with which to explore the technical requirements of 2-201.) In studying the materials dealing with 2-201, you should also consider the question of whether and how you would do business differently under the CISG, which does not have a Statute of Frauds at all.
As we discussed in class, I have arranged a makeup class for the evening of Monday the 15th, at 6:30. To help make it more palatable, I will order in pizza, so that you don't have to rush to fit in dinner before class.
Please also mark on your calendars that the midterm exam is not on October 26 as originally scheduled, but is now scheduled for the afternoon of Friday, November 2.
Reading assignments for week of October 1 (Posted 9/28/01).
On Tuesday, October 2, we will continue discussing basic concepts of article 2, beginning with the power of parties to contract out of the statute, and continuing onto the duty of good faith. On freedom of contract, you should read pp. 85-87 and 176-79, together with the first coursepack excerpt by Ayres and Gertner. Our discussion will focus on problem 2-5. On good faith, you should read p. 88100, with the coursepack readings by Klein and Hadfield as background. Our discussion of this topic, which will continue into the next class, will focus on Zapatha v. Dairy Mart.
On Thursday the 4th, we will finish discussing Zapatha and then, if there is time, work through problem 2-6. We will then take up the topic of contract formation. The reading here is pp. 501511; and we will begin working through problems 31 through 33.
Reading assignments for week of September 24 (Posted 9/21/01).
We will continue for the time being with the current reading schedule. On Tuesday, September 25, we will complete our discussion of the scope of the CISG, working through the remainder of problem 2-3. We will then proceed to consider some basic concepts in Article 2, focusing on the role of merchant status and on the power of parties to contract out of the statute. On the issue of merchant status, you should read pp. 73-85, focusing on problem 2-4. To answer this problem, you will need to read §2-104(1) carefully, and also to read and consider the purposes of §2-201(2). On contracting out of the statute, you should read pp. 85-87 and 176-79, together with the first coursepack excerpt by Ayres and Gertner. Our discussion here, which will probably spill over until the following class, will focus on problem 2-5.
On Thursday the 27th, we will not meet due to the observance of Yom Kippur. I will post an assignment for the following week by the afternoon of Friday the 28th.
Reading assignments for week of September 17. (Posted 9/14/01).
This week we will continue with the material scheduled for last week. By the end of the week I hope to finalize plans for making up our missed classes. Please don't hesitate to call or contact me if you need any assistance with missed material, class absences, or otherwise.
On Tuesday the 18th, class will not meet due to the observance of Rosh Hashanah.
On Thursday the 20th, we will complete our discussion of the scope of Article 2 and of the CISG. We will start by discussing Advent v Unisys, and then turn to a brief discussion of the note on UCITA at p. 70. We will then take up the CISG, focusing on problem 2-3. To answer this problem, you will need to read CISG Articles 1-6 and 10. To the extent there is time left at the end of the hour, I will lecture on some basic ideas in Article 2, beginning with the concept of merchant status [2-104(1)].
Reading assignments for week of September 10. (Posted 9/07/01).
This week we will discuss issues relating to the scope of Articles 2 and 2A and of the CISG; we will also begin discussing some basic concepts that underlie Article 2 analysis. You should make sure to bring your statute book to class, and to have had a look at the relevant statutory sections ahead of time.
On Tuesday the 11th, we will complete the material originally assigned for last week. You should read (or re-read) pages 53-55 and 58-73. We will start out by finishing problem 2-1, which should be fairly quick work. I will then lecture on Coakley v Williams, and we will then spend the bulk of the discussion on Advent v Unisys, which raises the question of whether transactions in computer software are covered by Article 2. This is the very issue that has held up the Article 2 revision process for several years, and may well have finally derailed it. (If you are interested in learning the more about the current status of the revision debate, here is a recent article from U.S. Law Week that reports on actions taken at the August 2001 general session of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, including a new compromise position on the scope issue.) We will finish up by discussing the material in the note at p. 70 et sq on UCITA.
On Thursday the 13th, we will turn our attention to the CISG and its scope, and then will return to Article 2 and the issue of merchant status. You should read pp. 73-85; we will focus in class discussion on problems 2-3 (scope of the CISG) and 2-4 (merchant status). In preparation for the latter discussion, you should look carefully at UCC §§2-104(1) and 2-201.
Assignment for the first day of class. The required texts are Richard Speidel and Linda Rusch, Commercial Transactions: Sales, Leases and Licenses (West Group: 2001), and Selected Commercial Statutes (West Group: 2001). There is also a short supplementary coursepack, available in hard copy at the Secretariat Office, Room 711 Jerome Greene Hall, and also available online to registered law students (you will need your UNI and password to access it from the university server). For Tuesday, September 4, please read pp. 135 in Speidel and Rusch, and please be prepared to discuss County Fire Door Corp. v. C.F. Wooding Co. (p. 26).
Please bring all your assigned materials with you, including your statute book, when you come to class.