Question

In 2004, real estate broker Richard Davis called an A&E television executive about partnering on a? new reality show called Flip This House. Davis said he would undertake the financial risks of purchas- ing and later reselling the real estate and he and the network would split the net profits. Davis received confirmation from the network director over the phone and later with three other executives. The network never paid Davis and claimed no agree- ment was made. The district court found on behalf of Davis, and the network appealed. The appellate court stipulated that two facts must be true to find on behalf of Davis: first, that Davis reasonably believed that an agreement was made during the phone conversations and, second, that such a belief would be made by an objectively reasonable per- son. How do you think the court decided? [Davis v. A&E Television, 422 Fed. Appx. 199, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 7382.]

Answer 1

I think the Court may have decided against Richard Davis because without a definite agreement in place, it should have been difficult for Richard Davis to prove that the an agreement was actually made upon receiving a confirmation message from the Network Director over an informal phone call. Written agreement thus had no room in the process to support the claims of Richard and hence in order to support Richard’s claims, the oral agreement would not have been binding upon the parties.

However, the only way Richard Davis could have probably won the case would have been in the circumstance where he could at least prove that how extensively did the network director followed by three other executives discussed with him about raising and splitting the revenue. Details of the same is not mentioned in the above question and hence inconclusive in nature. It is to be noted that in actual, the Court’s verdict was in favor of Richard Davis on various concrete grounds which cannot be ascertained from the details available in the above question.