NU The Conditional Offer of Employment Discussion Responses

Reply for these 4 students:

student1: In the case of [Ardito et al. v. City of Providence, 213 F. Supp. 2d 358 (D.R.I.)] we are discussing the fourteen applicants for a city of Providence, Rhode Island, police academy training class who received a letter of “conditional offer of employment”.

The offer would be considered the letter of “conditional offer of employment”. The acceptance would be up to the applicants completing the “conditional” components of the letter, in this case the medical and psychological exams. If successfully completed, the offer would be considered accepted and employment underway. “(An offer) is a promise that is conditional upon an act, a forbearance (a refraining from doing something one has a legal right to do), or return promise” (Twomey & etc., 2021). An offer has clearly been extended. In terms of acceptance, “No particular form of words or mode of expression is required, but there must be a clear expression that the offeree agrees to be bound by the terms of the offer”; moreover, “the offeree does not accept the offer by express agreement, but rather by performance” (Twomey & etc., 2021). The fourteen applications have clearly expressed their agreement to the offer by completing the conditional components in the shape of medical and psychological exams.

Next, the offer extended would be considered a unilateral contract. Unilateral contracts are made up by an offeror promising to do something only when the offeree fulfills a requirement or an act (Twomey & etc., 2021). The letter from the city was offering employment only valid if the two exams were successfully passed.

The city is in clear violation of their contract to the fourteen applicants attending the police academy training class. This would not be the case if the offer was terminated prior to hiring on the replacement applicants. It is the responsibility of the City to render the offer as voided due to the change in selection criteria.

student2: In the provided example, fourteen applicants were granted a conditional job offer contingent on passing medical and psychological testing. The offer came from the police academy training class. In this scenario, acceptance is the criterion defined by the city for the purpose of selection. The fourteen applicants must accept the city’s revised selection criteria. A bilateral contract is one in which promises are made in exchange for promises. A unilateral contract, on the other hand, is a contract in exchange for an act. In this scenario, it is a unilateral contract because the police academy made no promises to the fourteen applicants for the job offer. The candidate was offered a job after passing the medical and psychological examinations. As a result, it is a unilateral contract. When most people hear the phrase contract, they think of an agreement between two people, such as in commercial or personal contracts. However, they are not the only sorts of contracts that exist. Unilateral contracts are those that are formed by an offer that can only be accepted via performance. To construct a unilateral contract, the party making the offer, known as the offeror, makes a guarantee in exchange for the other party’s performance. The offer can only be accepted if the other party totally completes the specified activity. One simple method to recall the meaning of this form of contract is to concentrate on the term unilateral and break it down. To put it another way, the prefix “uni-” signifies “one.” As a result, a unilateral contract permits just one person to make a pledge or an agreement. Because a unilateral contract differs substantially from a bilateral contract, it may be beneficial to look at some instances to better appreciate the differences. A reward contract is a typical sort of unilateral contract encountered in everyday life.

student3: After reviewing the case there were a variety of information that I was able to gather to help me make my decision. In this situation, the contractual liability terminology that may apply in this case covers both a valid and implied contract. An implied contract are contracts expressed by conduct or implied or deduced from the facts. Whilst a valid contract are agreements that is binding and enforceable. (Twomey, 2021, p.212-213). Based on these definitions and the information provided in this case its more likely to ascertain that this an implied-in-fact contract.

According to the information provided in theAnderson’s Business Law and the Legal Environment – Comprehensive Edition (24th ed.)an implied-in-fact contract are based on an idea submission, plaintiffs must show (1) they conditioned the submission of their ideas on an obligation to pay for any use of the ideas; (2) the defendants voluntarily accepted the submission of ideas; and (3) the defendants actually used these ideas, rather than their own ideas with other sources. (Twomey, 2021, p.213).

Taking this information into consideration, the plaintiff Pascal made improvements to the Dozier’s house and reasonably expected to be paid by the defendant Dozier for his services rendered with an opportunity for the defendant to decline said services and whom instead chose not to do so. Dozier being the owner of the house, although the request was at the request from his daughter and grandson for the services rendered from the plaintiff Pascal was aware of the improvements that were being made but still decided not to object.

In conclusion, based on all the facts that were provided in this case, the implied-in-fact contract was formed which makes the defendant Dozier liable in honoring the contractual obligations and needs to pay the plaintiff Pascal for the improvements made in a reasonable valued payment amount for his services rendered. I would highly encourage the defendant Dozier to seek legal counsel to obtain more professional legal advice.

student4: In discussing liability, we are reviewing the case of homeowner, Dozier, and whether he is held reliable for improvements made to his house that he did not authorize. Despite not putting to an end to aforementioned improvements that he was aware of happening, Dozier also refuses liability when the request came from his daughter and grandson.

This in part comes back to our previous discussion on contract agreements. Dozier and Paschall did not enter into an agreement regarding the improvements to be made to the house, therefore, how could Paschall sue Dozier for the value?

Nevertheless, it would be quite simple for courts to find that a quasi contract has taken place and in this case will prevent unjust enrichment. “A successful claim for unjust enrichment usually requires (1) a benefit conferred on the defendant, (2) the defendant’s knowledge of the benefit, and (3) a finding that it would be unjust for the defendant to retain the benefit without payment” (Twomey & etc., 2021). Each of these three aspects have been proven here, proving the case for a quasi contract. A benefit was conferred on the defendant, Dozier, who received home improvements. Dozier was also aware of the improvements being made. Finally, it would be unjust for the Dozier to retain the benefit of the improvements without paying the plaintiff the value. The alternative to the latter would be, if possible, for the plaintiff to go in and remove all of the improvements made to the house which would come out to even more costs as well as time, which is money.

In summary, Dozier is liable for the expenses that went toward home improvements.