CNU Legal Aspects of Engineering discussion

User Generated

Vfznrry

Business Finance

California National University

Description

WRITING 3:

Gentlemen:

Welcome to your THIRD writing assignment. There are several issues here. As I mentioned in your first writing assignment you need to think about the issues fully and then organize your thoughts. You may have different laws which may apply.

TRY AND REFRAIN FROM STATEMENTS THAT CONCLUDE THINGS TOO QUICKLY.

This assignment is due on Thurssday, the 28th by 5p.m.

Mark

WRITING ASSIGNMENT NUMBER THREE

Caruana Industries (CI) wished to upgrade its 5,000 lighting fixtures to meet new energy conservation standards in the state of California. The company had been unable to find compatible lighting elements. CI had its CFO, Charles Oldman try and locate some sources for compatible elements. After an extensive search and due diligence, he found a seller named Texas Lights (TL).

CI wrote to TL on several occasions explaining its needs. This process began in February of 2018. After several rounds of talks, there seemed to be a sense that this could be done by both sides.

On July 1, 2018 TL e-mailed CI:

We believe we can manufacture the lighting elements that you require. We are prepared to supply 5,000 at $100 each. We understand that this is much more than you anticipated paying, but the redesign to meet your specifications will not be easy. We need to do this deal by September 1, 2018. If not, we will have to turn our attention elsewhere.

Oldmanwas relieved that CI would not need to replace its existing lighting fixtures. CI felt sufficiently confident that it would be able to secure funding for the purchase so it terminated ongoing negotiations with manufacturers for replacement lighting fixtures.

On August 1, CI received notice that funds would be available. It immediatelye-mailed TI: “We got the money. We have a done deal.”

On August 10, TL e-mailed CI:

We have reconsidered. Because of new commitments, we will not be able to supply the lighting elements as planned. Sorry.

Because its computer was down on August 10 and 11, CI was unaware of TL’s August 10th e-mail message.

On August 12, CI telephoned TL and the following exchange ensued:

CI: Our computers have been down for a couple of days, but we assume you got our message. Our people are real excited about this.

TL: What message? And we told you two days ago we could not do the lighting elements.

TL has refused to supply the lighting elements. It will be very difficult and expensive for CI to acquire replacement lighting fixtures.

CI alleges that this was a firm offer and that TL could not revoke the offer. TL disputes that there was an offer at all because the essential elements were never really laid out out and that this was in reality a negotiation. It was an invitation to them to get together to make a deal. Further there was no firm offer made pursuant to the UCC.

Please explain this situation thoroughly. Was there an offer? Why or why not....please explain what elements would have been necessary and what if anything would have been necessary.

Was there an acceptance? Why or why not? What is an acceptance and what was missing, if anything? What is the UCC and how would this situation be controlled by the UCC, if at all?

Please explain firm offers and the requirements of firm offers?

You are to assume that I have no knowledge of contract principles and you need to educate me about all of this. I anticipte the essay will be approximately 3 to 4 pages

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Running head: LEGAL ASPECTS OF ENGINEERING

Legal Aspects of Engineering

Student’s name:
Institutional affiliation:

1

LEGAL ASPECTS OF ENGINEERING

2

Legal Aspects of Engineering
The state of California had passed new laws outlining the energy conservation in the state,
hence Caruana Industries had to upgrade 5000of their lighting fixtures to meet the new energy
conservation laws. The company had been unable to get compatible lighting elements and after a
deep research, Charles Oldman, the chief financial officer, found Texas Lights as a partner. The
Texas Lighting wrote to the Caruana Industries affirming that they were willing to supply the
lighting elements at a cost of $100 each. The cost was far much higher than the CFO anticipated
and was relieved that the CL would not replace the lighting fixtures. After acquiring enough
funds, CI e-mailed the Tl and asked them to do the replacement but the TL Company was very
committed and replied two days later saying they were unable to supply. However, at the time of
reply the CI Company was undergoing computer breakdown and did not see the reply. After a
call directed to TL, CI accused them of breaching the Uniform Commercial Code.
CI alleged that the it had made a firm offer in the sense that there was a direct
communication with the TL and that the cost of the deal had been agreed on and that TL could
not revoke the deal. TL defends itself by claiming that there was no offer since the essential
elements were not laid and thus it did not qualify to be an offer rather it was an invitation to them
to come together and make a deal since there was no firm offer made pursuant to the UCC.
As per the communication CI had with PL, the CI seemed to be bound by the offer.
However, it comes out clearly that this was an invitation to offer and not an offer. This is because
CI does not meet the principle of co...


Anonymous
Super useful! Studypool never disappoints.

Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags