1. a. What detriment, if any, was sustained by the nephew?
b. What benefit, if any, was secured by the uncle?
c. As a matter of law, do we need to inquire into the uncle’s benefit? Explain.
2. Lampley began work as an at-will (can be dismissed or can quit at any time) employee of Celebrity Homes in Denver, Colorado, in May 1975. On July 29, 1975, Celebrity announced a profit-sharing plan for all employees if the company reached its goals for the fiscal year, April 1, 1975, to March 31, 1976. Lampley was dismissed in January 1976. Celebrity distributed its profits in May 1976. Lampley sued when she did not receive a share of the profits. Celebrity argued that its promise to share its profits was a gratuity, unsupported by consideration. Decide. Explain.
3. An accident in the early 1960s rendered Hoffman paraplegic. At Hoffman’s invitation, Thomas lived with and provided extensive physical care for Hoffman until Hoffman’s death in 2004. Thomas did not pay rent and Hoffman paid for Thomas’ food, provided her with a car and cell phone, and made occasional cash payments to Thomas. While never married, the couple exchanged rings in 2002 and Thomas testified that she felt they “lived as man and wife.” Thomas filed suit seeking $44,625 for services rendered to Hoffman. According to the trial court, her claim was based on the theories of “express or implied contract of employment” or “unjust enrichment.” Thomas lost at the trial level. How would you rule on appeal? Explain.
In 1869 William E. Story Sr. promised his nephew, W.E. Story II, that he would pay the nephew $5,000 upon his 21st birthday if the nephew would refrain from drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until he reached that 21st birthday. The nephew agreed and per-formed his promise, but the uncle died in 1887 without paying the money, and the administrator of the estate, Sidway, declined to pay the $5,000 plus interest.