In: Operations Management
Stewart invented “Max” a board game similar to “Tic Tac Toe.” In May 2017, Stewart began negotiating with Big Board, Inc., to license “Max” for distribution outside the United States. On June 11, 2017, the parties met and orally discussed terms. As compensation, Big Board promised to pay Stewart the amount due from another board game he had developed for Big Board two years ago. On June 26, 2017, Lisa, a Big Board employee, sent Stewart an email titled “Max Deal” that repeated all terms previously discussed and added that they “have been agreed to by Big Board subject to a written contract” and was signed with an electronic signature “Best Regards Lisa”.On July 01, 2017, Stewart emailed Big Board a more formal draft of the terms prepared by his lawyer, which Stewart signed, stating the contract needed to be signed and returned within 10 days but Big Board did not sign or return the contract. Big Board subsequently displayed Max at its pre-Toy Fair in August 2017. After the fair, Big Board sent Stewart an unsigned email saying that it no longer wished to license his game.
Analyze the facts, discuss the applicable law, and reach a logical conclusion as to whether or not there is a legal contract/agreement. Make reasonable assumptions when necessary to complete your analysis. Answer must be no less than 250 words.
BUSINESS LAW
The facts related to the case are:
1. An offer started by the Stewart which is an oral agreement for the Max Board Game.
2. The two parties involved are Stewart and Big Board, Inc.
3. Both the parties meet and discussed obligation orally.
4. The email communication has been initiated by the Big Board, Inc. employee which was digitally signed.
5. The Stewart was not agreed on the digitally signed email so he asked for the signed contract.
6. The Stewart product was used by the company in a fair by the Big Board, Inc.
7. After a fair, Big Board, Inc. sent an unsigned mail stating that they no longer wish to be the part of deal.
As per the Contract Laws, if any agreement between two parties is done either written or orally, they are bind for the obligations. Here although the case of contract starts orally but there is a written proof of agreement by the company employee which is electronically signed. Hence, the contract is valid. The Stewart has the right to sue the Big Board, Inc. for the unethical behavior. The proof of oral agreement is an offer, Acceptance and consideration. All the three things are actually performed between two parties electronically. Hence, they are eligible for the contract.
The conclusion of the case is that Big Board, Inc. is liable for its obligations so they can not refuse the deal after the usage of another party i.e. Stewart game specific product “Max”.