Question

Nick, a retired professional football player, signed a one-year contract effective January 1 with Grills to promote its cooking grills. Grills also signed and promised to pay Nick $50,000 per month. Nick promised to act in six commercials for Grills, filming at times mutually agreed upon by the parties. Nick also promised to make two promotional appearances (“appearances”) every month.

The contract contained the following provision: PARAGRAPH (6): If Nick engages in disreputable conduct that reflects adversely on Grills or its association with Nick, Grills at its option may terminate this agreement.

Nick acted in two commercials from January to May and attended all appearances.

In June, Nick did not show up for the filming for the third commercial because he had overslept. Nick offered to pay the cost of the film crew and said he’d be available any time Grills wished to reschedule. Nick was on time for the next two appearances and received his June check.

In July, Nick was the subject of stories in magazines and sports programs, which included photos of him at the roulette table at Casino with a drink in his hand, looking quite intoxicated, and hanging onto people to keep from falling down. The news stories were more humorous than critical.

Two days later, Grills emailed Nick, stating that his contract had been terminated “due to the breach of your obligations with respect to television commercials and because Grills is invoking Paragraph 6 based on your conduct at Casino, documented in news stories in July.”

Nick believes the real reason Grills terminated his deal was because grill sales were down. Nick’s advertising expert was surprised by the termination because news stories like the one Grills complained of are common and have little negative effect on companies that hire athletes to promote their products.

From August through December, Nick tried to get work from other companies. He had one company say they were a direct competitor of Grills so that would be confusing to their brand. Another company wanted to know more details of why Nick was dropped from his contract, which Grills had made Nick sign a non-disclosure agreement restricting him from speaking about his relationship with the company.

Nick sued Grills for breach of contract.

• Was there a contract here? Go through the elements before determining.
• Was there a breach of contract here? Go through the elements before determining.
• What would be Nick’s strongest claim for receiving the remainder of his contract?

Answer 1

Given, Nick a retired professional football player, signed a one year contract effective January 1 with Grills to promote its cooking Grills. Grils signed an dpromised to pay Nick $50,000 per month.Nick promised to act in 6 commercials, filming at times and alos to mae two promotional apppearances every month.

Was there a contract here?

Yes, there was a writhhencontrcat between Nick and grills who mutualy agreeing upon. Nick promised to act in 6 commercials, filming at times and alos to mae two promotional apppearances every month. Gril also promised to pay Nick $50,000 each month. Hence there is a contract

Was there a breach of contract here?

It is said to be a breach of contract if any of the parties to the contract fails to fulfill the terms of the agreement. In the given case, Nick and Grills entered into an agreement for 1 year where Grills agreed to make a payment of $50,000 every month for promoting its cooking grills. But one day Grills has terminated the contract forthe conduct of Nick at casino documneted in news stories about which they hasve already agred upon in the contract.The agreement contains "If Nick engages in disreputable conduct that reflects adversely on Grills or its association with Nick, Grills at its option may terminate this agreement.:

In such a acse there is no breach of contract. But, is said that the news stories were humerous and not critical. and the effect on the grills company is also little negative. So, in such a case it is considered to be a breach of contract.

What would be Nick’s strongest claim for receiving the remainder of his contract?

The strongest claim for receiving the remainder of his contract is by saying that the agreement containd that Grills can terminate the agreement only when the conduct of Nick adversely effects the business of Grills, but the misconduct of Grills had only little negative effect on Grills company.