8. Janis O\'Brien watched snowplow drivers employed by Shawn and Doug\'s Emergen

Question

8. Janis O'Brien watched snowplow drivers employed by Shawn and Doug's Emergency Services as they plowed her driveway (which was 100 yards long up a steep grade from her home at 109 South Oberlin Road). O'Brien had no contract with Shawn and Doug's and had not ordered any snow removal that winter. The treatment should have been performed on a house at 109 Wayne Street, which was one street north of South Oberlin. O'Brien never stopped the plows, even though she knew that a mistake had been made. In April, when a $379 bill came for the plowing (it was a really, really bad winter) O'Brien refused to pay because she had no contract with Shawn and Doug's. She was, by the way, correct on this point. Does Shawn and Doug's have any contract law theory to work with, should it decide to take O'Brien to small claims court in Mayville County? Explain.

Explanation / Answer

Shawn and Doug’s does not have a contract with O’Brien. For a valid contract there needs to be an offer, an acceptance, consideration and legal intention. However, from the case we see that there has been no offer. It is true that O’Brien saw them plow the snow but she neither objected nor responded to that action.

Now, under common law, inaction cannot be considered as a consent (acceptance) to a service. With that in mind we also need to remember that Shawn and Doug’s had not made any offer to plow O’Brien’s driveway. In every possibility, there is absolutely contract between the two parties and taking O’Brien to small claims court will be a mistake.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse 8
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.