Marie-Claude V. Case

Case Facts in Summary
Marie-Claude owned and operated a bowling alley within a commercial setting (Willes & Willes, 2012). The location of the alley lay adjacent to a residential area. The parking lot next to the bowling alley became the children’s playground. Marie-Claude frequently sent children off the premises for fear of injury. One notorious boy aged six years would scale up the fence and gain access to the flat roof. Although Marie-Claude vehemently objected to such action, the boy continued anyway and was injured.
Legal Issue/ Question
The legal issue, in this case, is to determine whether Marie-Claude was liable for the accident and the injury caused to the child.
Plaintiff’s Arguments
The plaintiff of the case is the notorious child’s

For this contract to be legally binding, six tenets must be fulfilled. First, the defendant expressed an intention to establish a legal relationship by making a proposal in writing and expecting a response in writing as well, which was fulfilled after the plaintiff accepted all the terms given by the defendant. Secondly, the defendant made an offer in the letter and the plaintiff accepted the offer, including all other terms therein (Willes & Willes, 2012). Thirdly, the plaintiff expressed acceptance of the offer through writing. Also, the plaintiff did consider the terms of the offer by looking at the market price movement and accepting the terms given in the offer (Psarras & Zelinger, 2010). Besides, both the plaintiff and the defendant had the capacity to contract because they were not under any undue influence, which would be grounds for incapacity to contract. Moreover, only the plaintiff could make a counteroffer based on the nature of the contract and thus, the plaintiff had a legal right to purchase the scrap mica at offer price because the offer was not time bound and was done within a reasonable

The terms were that a deposit of $ 100 was payable with the order form with a monthly remittance of $ 50, payable for three years. The requirement in the order form included the applicant’s name, address, and signature. After servicing the purchase for a while, Alice decided to withdraw from the contract, but the firm demanded that she return the silverware and the firm would also retain all the money paid as a breach of contract and release from the