Contracts Legal Questions

You should call the clerk of the small claims court to ask these questions, because small claims court rules are sometimes different.  The first thing you should ask is whether you can sue the Delaware theater in Branson small claims court because (even assuming that you would have jurisdiction in a Missouri court of general jurisdiction, which is not certain) small claims courts often have limited jurisdictions where you can't sue someone from out of state.  Also, the small claims court may not handle claims as large as $8,500.  Also, in general, an llc is a separate legal entity, so you would not be representing yourself, and therefore you can't represent the llc  unless you are an attorney.  I think you can sue a non-profit in small claims court, but again the clerk can tell you definitely.... Read More

Your question is complicated and may depend on who you're fighting with.  If the owner was trying to get you out, and your only basis for occupancy was a forged sublease, you would probably lose.  The only chance I can see is if you could show that the owner knew or should have known about the forged sublease and went along with it, thereby ratifying it.  This is a longshot.  However, if you ask the owner to approve the sublease now, he/she/it could do so and it would be as if he/she/it had signed it originally, with no forgery.  Your mother-in-law, the forger, can't claim any benefits from the forgery.  Even if you don't get the owner to ratify the sublease, your mother-in-law can't resist eviction by attacking her own forgery - the fake won't give you any rights against the owner, whose signature was forged, but it is valid as against your mother-in-law.... Read More

It depends on what "legal document" your grandfather left. If the legal document could be interpreted to be a Will, then it would need to have been probated. If there is no Will and your grandparents built the hosue during their marraige AND did not have any other children outside of the marriage, most likely the only signature needed on a deed is your grandmother's.... Read More

It's impossible to tell with certainty, but the more limited the restrictions, the more likely it is to be enforced.  For example, a contract prohibiting you from performing any services within 2 miles from your prior office or for any person or entity which had been a customer of your former employer within the past year, is more likely to be enforced than one which is very general, as you've described in your question (I suspect that the actual clause is narrower than you've described).  The enforceability of these clauses is very fact sensitive. depending on, in addition to the breadth of the clausae (how long, over what geographic area, prohibiting what activities) numerous factors including, but not limited to, the nature of your former employer's business and the industry (does it operate worldwide or draw its customers only from the immediate neighborhood, are there repeat customers and a lot of customer loyalty, can you locate potential customers in an online directory or do you need specialized knowledge, etc.), whether your job requires some specialized skill and/or training or can be filled by anyone off the street (e.g. it is much more likely to be enforced if you are an interior designer than if you worked in the store room), your position in your former employer's organization (the clause is much more likely to be enforced against a vice-president than an entry level employee), whether and to what extent your former employer invested time and money in training you and/or acquiring its customers and/or developing its product or services, the extent to which you had contact with your former employer's customers, the extent to which you had access to your former employer's trade secrets or other proprietary information, the degree to which your services are needed to serve the public interest in your community, whether you received additional compensation (beyone just keeping your job) in exchange for the non-compete obligations to which you agreed, etc. etc.  Also, in some cases courts will "blue pencil" non-competes which they think are overbroad, for example if a court thinks 3 months is too long, it may enforce the clause but only for two months.  In other words, it's impossible to be certain about whether the contract will be deemed enforceable without knowing a lot more than you can convey in an email, and even after an attorney has all the facts, the answer likely will still not be black and white, but the attorney will only be able to give you probabilities that you will succeed if you challenge the contract. ... Read More

If you have a valid contract, the owner can't change any of the terms without your consent  unless the contract provides that he can.   Thus, for example, if the contract provided that you can farm such acres as the owner shall designate, he could change the acreage.  If there is no provision giving him the right to change the terms, however, then he cannot legally do so. I see no reason in your email why your contract should not be valid, but the law may be different in North Dakota.  Your contract is in writing and signed, and in the states in which I practice would not require any further formality to be valid.  Again, it is possible that North Dakota law would require that the contract be witnessed, notarizede, or some other formality, but I would doubt it.... Read More

Your daughter does not have to attend a private school thqat her parents don't want her to attend, but whether you would still be obligated under the contract you signed once she left depends on (a) what the contract provides; and (b) whether there is any basis to invalidate the contract.  There is no such basis apparent from your question, unless when you write that "it's not like I thought it was going to be" you meant that you had been defrauded into contracting, i.e. that there was a factual misrepresentation made to you by the school which it knew to be false and which you relied on in contracting.  In most cases, such a misrepresentation would have to be in the actual written contract to be a basis for negating it.... Read More

A text can be a legally sufficientl writing to create a contract.  Indeed, most contracts do not have to be in writing to be enforced, although obviously oral contracts are harder to proved.  Although you may not have believed you had a contract until and unless you got a signed quote, you did not indicate that in your ocmmunicaitons.  If you had texted something like "subject to my receiving a signed quote", you would be in a better position. However, your position is still probably pretty good.  The question here is whether  a contract was ever formed when a price was never agreed upon; usually price is a fundamental term without which a contract can't be formed, but in some instances, for example where there is a course of dealing or a set price in the industry, a contract can be formed even though the parties never explicitly agreed on a price.  The other question is what, if any, damages the other party suffered due to your breach (if it was a breach).  If he/she had time to replace you, and paid a standard price to do so, there may be none,and you would have little exposure even if you are deemd to have breached.... Read More

The answer to "can I sue ..." is always yes.  Anybody can sue anybody for anything, although some cases may be dismissed before trial if they are legally defective.  I see nothing apparent in your email that indicates that you would not make it to trial.  If you received below standard services that would be a breach of contract, and you might be able to get your money back or, if you have received the services and can't return them, the difference in value between what you paid for and what you received.  That is assuming that the judge or jury agrees with you that the work was below standard.  Also it is not clear who you contracted with.  If, for example, you contracted with xyz photography, inc., and xyz photography, inc is now out of business, it is doubtful that you will be able to collect on any judgment you obtain.... Read More

A case against who?  From what you've written it appears that the company which arguably breached its contract with you is no longer in business. and has no assets with which to pay you even if you could sucessfully sue it.  Also, if the stores went out of business in 2012, it is likely that the statute of limitations on any claim has expired.... Read More