Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help
Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help
Homework answers / question archive / Legendary Homes, a home builder, purchased various appliances from Ron Mead T
Legendary Homes, a home builder, purchased various appliances from Ron Mead T.V. & Appliances, a retail merchant selling home appliances. They were intended to be installed in one of Legendary Homes' houses and were to be delivered on February 1 at 5 o'clock on that day, the appliance had not been delivered. Legendary Homes' employees closed the home and left. Sometime between 5 and 6:30, Mead delivered the appliances. No one was at the home so the delivery-person put the appliances in the garage. During the night, someone stole the appliances. Legendary Homes denied it was responsible for the loss and refused to pay Mead for the appliances. Mead then brought suit for the purchase price.
Did Legendary Homes have the risk of loss of the appliances? Please respond fully using IRAC METHOD.
IRAC METHOD EXAMPLE: To brief cases, case problems and questions, use the following “IRAC” format
ISSUE: What question must be answered in order to reach a conclusion in the case? This should be a legal question which, when answered, gives a result in the particular case. Make it specific (e.g. “Has there been a false imprisonment if the plaintiff was asleep at the time of 'confinement'?”) rather than general. Most cases present one issue. If there is more than one issue, list all, and give rules for all issues raised.
RULE: The rule is the law which applies to the issue. It should be stated as a general principal, (e.g. A duty of care is owed whenever the defendant should anticipate that her conduct could create a risk of harm to the plaintiff.) not a conclusion to the particular case being briefed, (e.g. “The plaintiff was negligent.”)
APPLICATION: The application is a discussion of how the rule applies to the facts of a particular case. While the issue and rule are normally only one sentence each, the application is normally paragraphs long. It should be written debate -not simply a statement of the conclusion. Whenever possible, present both sides of any issue. Do not begin with your conclusion. The application shows how you are able to reason on paper and is the most difficult (and, on exams, the most important) skill you will learn.
CONCLUSION: What was the result of the case? With cases, the text gives you a background of the facts along with the judge’s reasoning and conclusion. When you brief cases, you are basically summarizing the judge's opinion. With case problems, the editors have given you a summary of the facts of an actual case, but have not given you the judge's opinion. Your job is to act as the judge in reasoning your way to a ruling, again using the IRAC format.
Did Legendary Homes have the risk of loss of the appliances?
Issue
The issue in our scenario encompasses Ron Mead doing delivery of appliances to Legendary Homes. While delivering, Ron Mead arrived at the delivery point late than the stipulated time; Ron Mead found no one and chose to place the goods in a garage that was unlocked and in a house that was typically under construction, which led to the loss of the goods. The loss of the goods prompted the seller to file a suit against the buyer.
Rule
Usually, the typical rule of risk of loss is usually asserts that: "the risk of loss typically changes when the person selling goods completed and met all obligations stated under the contract."
Application
Typically, according to the risk of loss, the party that presently holds the goods title usually bears the risk of loss for these particular goods. In our case scenario, Ron Mead tends to retain the risk of loss since the title wasn't successfully passed down to Legendary homes who would have barred the risk. The fact that Ron Mead came and placed the goods in a garage that was unlocked and in a house that was typically under construction didn't give the buyers that are Legendary Homes a chance to take physical possession of the goods. To add to that, the tender of goods delivery tends to require the seller that is Rod Mead put and hold on the goods at the disposition of the buyer and hand the buyer a notification to give Legendary homes a chance to take the delivery.
Conclusion
The case in our scenario entails Ron Mead doing delivery of appliances to Legendary Homes at a certain period. Still, the delivery was done late than the stipulated time; Ron Mead found no one and chose to place the goods in a garage that was unlocked and in a house that was typically under construction, which led to the loss of the goods. In the lawsuit filed by Ron Mead, it is imperative to note that the risk of loss on the electrical appliances' goods was never transferred to Legendary Homes. Usually, the risk of loss is always applied when the buyer has received a particular good from the seller. In our case, the buyer didn't have any knowledge that the appliance had been delivered, and for this reason, the risk of loss didn't occur yet on the side of the buyer.
