Summarize a personal experience in which you entered into a contract that you did not think of as a binding contract at the time.

Overview
In the case of Lucy v. Zehmer, Zehmer spent the night drinking with his friend Lucy. During the evening, a piece of paper was signed whereby Zehmer agreed to sell his farm to Lucy. In this assignment, you will review the full case study in your textbook, analyze the contractual elements and ruling, and indicate whether you agree with the ruling.
Prompt
Read the Lucy v. Zehmer case summary in the “Elements of the Offer” section of Chapter 14 in your textbook, and the analyze the case in relation to contract law.
Specifically, you must address the following rubric criteria:
Identify the contractual element Zehmer contended was missing.
Summarize the court ruling and explain the reason for the ruling.
Agree or disagree with the ruling, and include a rationale to support your ideas.
Summarize a personal experience in which you entered into a contract that you did not think of as a binding contract at the time. Consider which elements of a contract were in place and which were missing.
Guidelines for Submission
Submit your case analysis as a Word document. Write a 1- to 2-paragraph response for each of the 4 rubric criteria. Sources should be cited according to APA style.
Module Six Case Analysis Rubric
Criteria Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value
Contractual Element Exceeds proficiency in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner Accurately identifies the contractual element Zehmer argued was missing Shows progress toward proficiency, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include accurately identifying the contractual element Zehmer was missing Does not attempt criterion 20
Court Ruling and Reasoning Exceeds proficiency in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner Summarizes the court’s ruling and accurately explains the reason for the ruling Shows progress toward proficiency, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include a more complete summary of the court’s ruling or additional support explaining the reason for the ruling Does not attempt criterion 20
Agree or Disagree Exceeds proficiency in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner Indicates agreement or disagreement with the ruling and provides a cogent description of the reasoning behind the ruling Shows progress toward proficiency, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include a more clear statement of agreement or disagreement or a more logical description of the reasoning behind the ruling Does not attempt criterion 25
Entering Into a Contract Exceeds proficiency in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner Summarizes an experience with a personal contract and considers which elements of the contract were in place and which were missing Shows progress toward proficiency, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include a more complete explanation of the contract or a more accurate identification of the contract elements that were in place or missing Does not attempt criterion 25
Articulation of Response Exceeds proficiency in an exceptionally clear, insightful, sophisticated, or creative manner Clearly conveys meaning with correct grammar, sentence structure, and spelling, demonstrating an understanding of audience and purpose Shows progress toward proficiency, but with errors in grammar, sentence structure, and spelling, negatively impacting readability Submission has critical errors in grammar, sentence structure, and spelling, preventing understanding of ideas 5
Citations and Attributions Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with few or no minor errors Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with consistent minor errors Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with major errors Does not use citations for ideas requiring attribution 5
Total: 100%

Leave a Comment