Vian v. Carey
Facts: Defendant Mariah Carey is a famous, successful, and wealth entertainer. Plaintiff Joseph Vian who used to be Carey stepfather is suing her. Vian claimed to have orally agreed with Carey to market singing dolls in her likeness.
History: A motion of summary was given after the U.S. District court of New York saw the case.
Issue: The issue is whether the objective circumstances indicate that the parties intended to form a contract
Holding: Under the law of New York, an oral agreement can be binding.
Dissent: The terms of the agreement are so vague and indefinite that there is no basis or standard for deciding whether the agreement had been kept or broken and no means by which such terms may be made certain.…show more content… The reason for this is because Carey claimed that she never thought Vian was serious as they spoke so infrequently and it was made at informal family settings.
2. Should the court here fill in the missing terms to provide the necessary definiteness?
No I don’t think that the court should fill in the missing terms because it should be up to the both parties to make sure contract terms are clear and agreeable for both parties.
Hamer v. Sidway
Facts: William E. Story had promised his nephew, William E. Story II, $5,000 if his nephew would abstain from drinking alcohol, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until the nephew reached 21 years of age. The uncle responded to his nephew in a letter dated February 6, 1875 in which he told his nephew that he would fulfill his promise. The uncle died a couple years later without sending the money to the nephew.
Issue: did the contract lack consideration to support it, and therefore invalid?
Holding: a wavier of any legal right at the request of another party is sufficient consideration for a promise.
Dissent: The uncle company is required to pay the 5000 and interest on top of that because the plaintiff followed the agreement by restraining from drinking, smoking, and