Osma1

Nick Osma
Professor OBrien
Quiz 2
Spring 2017

THE ASTON MARTIN CASE

James Bond is selling his rare Aston Martin on Graigslist for $70,000. Ernst sees this

advertisement and calls James to tell him that he would be right over to check out the car.

James promised to hold the car until Ernst arrived. While James was waiting for Ernst to

arrive, he received a call from another buyer who wanted to buy the car for $80,000. Ernst

ran into helicopter trouble and was delayed for hours before he was finally able to get to

James. When Ernst arrived to see the car, James was not present and his assistant told Ernst

that he had gone to sell the car to the other buyer. Ernst was frustrated and still wanted an

Aston Martin so he flew to the nearest dealer and purchased one off the lot for $90,000 and

then paid another $10,000 for the car to be upgraded like James Bonds. While Ernst was at

the dealership, Ronald Rump took keys from the dealer key board and Ernst jumped on the

car to restrain Ronald from getting away. Ernst was wearing a custom suit that was ruined

from jumping on the car. The suit cost him $6,000 on Saville Row in London. Ernst thinks he

can receive compensation from James for having to pay more for the Aston Martin so he

contacts his lawyer.

ANALYSIS

Starting with Step 1, I discovered that there was no contract due to the reason that

there was no offer. James put out an advertisement but advertisements are not offers.

General advertisements are usually not offers because they are sufficiently definite, they

are not communicated to a specific person or persons, and the circumstances of publication

indicate lack of contractual intent. Advertisements are usually considered to be invitations

to deal, meaning invitations to the public to make offers to the advertiser (pg. 100).

Because there is no offer, there cannot be a contract formed between James and Ernst.

There are reasons why this can be a case of Promissory Estoppel because there was a

promise made, and detriment along with reliance were involved as well. Another way this
 Osma2

case can be seen is a Quasi Contract or Quantum Meruit. There was no agreement made

between James and Ernst which does make sense if this is a quasi contract. Lastly, there are

no real remedies present in this case due to the fact of there being no contract.

Step 2 requires me to focus on identifying whether a contract is present. A contract

is a legally enforceable agreement, express or implied (pg. 93). The first thing I identified

was that there was no offer. There was no offer because James used Graigslist to advertise

his car being for sale. Advertisements are usually considered to be invitations to deal,

meaning invitations to the public to make offers to the advertiser (pg. 100). Since no offer

was made, there could be no acceptance, consideration, capacity or legal purpose involved

in this case.

Step 3 is about what is needed to have a valid promissory estoppel. Promissory

Estoppel occurs when a promise is made without any consideration, but the promisee,

relying upon the gratuitous promise, takes certain action, or fails to take action, to his

detriment. The promisor should know, or reasonably expect, that the promisee will act in

reliance (pg. 109). Firstly, there was a promise made by James to Ernst about James

holding the car until Ernst arrived. Secondly is understanding if there was any detriment to

either of the parties. Detriment is forbearance in serving as consideration or value (pg.

681). Ernst had to buy his Aston Martin from someone else, costing him more money and

had his suit ruined stopping Ronald Rump from stealing a car. Reliance was exhibited by

Ernst relying on James to hold the car for him, but also by James relying on Ernst to be right

over. Fair compensation is addressed when the time is appropriate.

Step 4 is about how a quasi contract operates. Quasi contracts are created by

operation of law in order to avoid unjust enrichment of one party at the expense of another

(pg. 95). Quantum Meruit is defined as as much as he/she earned; the compensation

permitted by law to the performing party in a quasi contract (pg. 739). There is no

agreement involved which fits for this case because there was no agreement made between

the two parties, there must be a benefit rendered, and there must be fair compensation to

be classified as a quasi contract.

 Osma3

Step 5 is regarding remedies. A remedy is legal relief (by judicial decree or by

contract) that prevents a wrong, enforces a right, or compensates a party from harm caused

by a violation of his rights (pg. 743). Damages, Injunction relief, reformation, rescission, and

specific performance are all remedies that can occur in a case. Since there is no contract

formed, these remedies cannot be present in this case.

ANSWER

After investigating the situation and going through all the necessary steps, I have

determined that because advertisements are not offers (pg. 100) there is no legal contract.

Moving forward, Ernst does have a valid claim against James. James promised Ernst an

opportunity to view the car and did not follow through on that promise. On the other side,

James did wait some time for Ernst to show up, but when another offer of $80,000 came into

the picture, James had no choice but to sell his car. As you can see there are two valid sides

to this case.

The case of James and Ernst is a Promissory Estoppel. There was a promise made by James

to Ernst about James holding the car for Ernst until he arrived. Ernsts detriment was him

having to pay an extra $30,000 for a different car, from a different dealer than he originally

planned. Ernst was relying on James to hold the car for him which is why Ernst went through

hours of trouble to go see the car. James did not wait and that is why Ernst has a valid claim

against him. Fair compensation is the last thing that needs to happen for this case to be a

Promissory Estoppel and I came up with this solution, James takes the $10,000 he made

profit on selling his car and gives it to Ernst who ended up paying $30,000 more than he

planned. This would make James go back to what he originally wanted for his car and Ernst

would get reimbursed for upgrading his new Aston Martin to be like James.

As far as Ernst getting the car dealer to reimburse him for his suit, I think he has

another valid claim. This would classify as a quasi contract because there was no agreement

between the dealership and Ernst regarding him stopping Ronald Rump from stealing a car.

There were benefits rendered by the dealership because they did not lose a car, and fair
 Osma4

compensation for this case would be Ernsts quantum meruit of $6,000 for his custom suit

that was ruined stopping a crime.