case discuss problem
Place your order today and enjoy professional academic writing services—From simple class assignments to dissertations. Give us a chance to impress you.
Order a Similar Paper
Order a Different Paper
Jane Francois married Victor H. Francois. At the time of the marriage, Victor was a fifty-year-old bachelor living with his elderly mother, and Jane was a thirty-year-old, twice-divorced mother of two. Victor had a relatively secure financial portfolio; Jane, on the other hand, brought no money or property to the marriage.
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlinesOrder Paper Now
The marriage deteriorated quickly over the next couple of years, with disputes centered on financial matters. During this period, Jane systematically gained a joint interest in, and took control of, most of Victor’s assets. Three years after they married, Jane contracted Harold Monoson, an attorney, to draw up divorce papers. Victor was unaware of Jane’s decision until he was taken to Monoson’s office, where Monoson presented for Victor’s signature a “Property Settlement and Separation Agreement.” Monoson told Victor that he would need an attorney, but Jane vetoed Victor’s choice. Monoson then asked another lawyer, Gregory Ball, to come into the office. Ball read the agreement and strenuously advised Victor not to sign it because it would commit him to financial suicide. The agreement transferred most of Victor’s remaining assets to Jane. Victor, however, signed it because Jane and Monoson persuaded him that it was the only way that his marriage could be saved. In October of the following year, Jane informed Victor that she had sold most of his former property and that she was leaving him permanently. Can Victor have the agreement set aside as a result of undue influence? Explain.
- Discuss Chapter problem dealing with the Jane and Victor Francois scenario.Can Victor’s financial portfolio be saved?
- What are arguments and Concepts that can be used by Victor?
- What are counter arguments that can be used by Jane?
- Who do you think Wins and Why?
Definition wrongful act or threat that overcomes the free will of a party
Physical Compulsion coercion involving physical force renders the agreement void
Improper Threats improper threats or acts, including economic and social coercion, render the contract voidable
Definition taking unfair advantage of a person by reason of a dominant position based on a confidential relationship
Effect renders the contract voidable
Fraud in the Execution a misrepresentation that deceives the other party as to the nature of a document evidencing the contract; renders the agreement void
Fraud in the Inducement renders the agreement voidable if the following elements are present:
False Representation positive statement or conduct that misleads
Fact an event that occurred or a thing that actually exists
Materiality misrepresentation that would be likely to induce a reasonable person to manifest her assent
Knowledge of Falsity and Intention to Deceive (called scienter) and includes
lack of belief in the statement’s truthfulness, or
reckless indifference to the statement’s truthfulness
Justifiable Reliance a defrauded party is reasonably influenced by the misrepresentation
Negligent Misrepresentation misrepresentation made without knowledge of its falsity and without due care in ascertaining its truthfulness; renders the contract voidable
Innocent Misrepresentation misrepresentation made without knowledge of its falsity but with due care; renders the contract voidable
Definition an understanding that is not in accord with existing fact
Mutual Mistake both parties have a common but erroneous belief forming the basis of the contract; renders the contract voidable by either party
Unilateral Mistake courts are unlikely to grant relief unless the error is known or should be known by the nonmistaken party
Assumption of Risk of Mistake a party may assume the risk of a mistake
Effect of Fault upon Mistake not a bar to avoidance unless the fault amounts to a failure to act in good faith