Problem 1: Samantha Parker, president of Active Seniors Assisted Living in Chicago, decides to purchase some adult tricycles for her residents who still enjoy riding bikes but lack the balance to ride a traditional bicycle. She speaks with Joe Ladewski, owner of Orland Cyclery in the Chicago suburb of Orland Park, about the possibility of buying one dozen adult Schwinn brand tricycles at a cost of $700 per trike, delivery to take place in one month. Samantha also speaks to a couple of other local bike dealers concerning her plans to make this purchase. The day following their conversation, Joe sends Samantha a written confirmation stating the terms of what Joe believes is an oral contract, including the quantity and price that were discussed, and including Joe's signature on the confirmation. Samantha receives Joe's written confirmation but never gets around to reading it. A few more weeks pass, and Joe delivers the 12 adult trikes to Active Seniors and sends Samantha a bill for $8,400. Samantha, who views her earlier conversation with Joe as merely a discussion and not a firm contract, refuses to pay the bill and insists that Joe take his trikes back. Joe sues Active Seniors for the purchase price, and Samantha is deposed. In Samantha's deposition, she admits that she received Joe's letter and that she failed to object to the contents of the letter. Based on that deposition, Joe asks the court to grant summary judgment on his action to enforce the oral contract for the sale of the adult trikes. Samantha's lawyer pleads the statute of frauds as a defense to Joe's summary judgment motion. Under the circumstances, should the court grant Joe's summary judgment motion to enforce the sales contract?
Problem 2:
a. Now imagine that Samantha and Joe from Problem 5.4 above enter into an oral contract in which Orland Cyclery agrees to sell to Active Seniors just one economy-model adult tricycle for $400, delivery to take place at the end of the month. Two days following that oral contract, the two parties speak again, at which point Samantha suggests that instead of just the one tricycle at the end of this month, Joe should instead deliver a new $400 economy-model adult trike at the end of each month for the entire upcoming year. Nothing is put in writing about either the original oral contract or the oral contract as modified. Suppose that Samantha has a change of heart about this modification for a year's worth of monthly trike purchases, and she simply wants to buy the one $400 trike as originally agreed. Will Joe be able to enforce the contract as modified for the sale of a dozen $400 trikes over the next year?
b. Same facts as part a., except that the original contract is in writing and is for a single Schwinn adult tricycle (not the economy model) for $700 at the end of the month. In this variation, the oral modification is simply to add to the original contract a $400 economy-model adult tricycle, also to be delivered at the end of the month. Suppose that Samantha has a change of heart about this modification and simply wants to buy the one $700 Schwinn trike as originally agreed to in writing. Will Joe be able to enforce the contract as modified to include the sale of the $400 bike in addition?
c. Same facts as part a., except that the original contract is in writing and is for a single Schwinn adult tricycle (not the economy model) for $700 at the end of the month. In this variation, the oral modification is simply to add to the original contract three $400 economy-model adult tricycles, also to be delivered at the end of the month. Suppose that Samantha has a change of heart about this modification and simply wants to buy the one $700 Schwinn trike as originally agreed. Will Joe be able to enforce the contract as modified to include the sale of the three $400 bikes in addition?