I need a new answer not a copy and paste from someone else who ask this question

2 Paragraphs total one for each issue

Please an original answer !!!!!

Issue 1:

In February 1824, Levi Wyman sailed to the U.S. from a foreign country. He then became very ill while at the house of Daniel Mills. Mills sheltered and cared for Levi, including providing for doctor visits, during the illness, which lasted at least 2 weeks. At one point during the illness, Levi was so sick that he was pronounced dead.

Levi could not pay for the expenses incurred during his illness, but he told Mills that his father, Col. Seth Wyman, would pay. Mills contacted Seth Wyman. who wrote back promising to pay Mills if Levi could not.

Levi Wyman eventually recovered from his illness. Mills was never paid for his expenses. Mills sued Seth Wyman. In deciding the case, the court said that Seth should pay Mills because he has a moral obligation to pay. However, the law leaves moral obligations to one's conscience, and does not provide legal remedies for breaking such obligations. The court decided that moral obligations are not adequate consideration for a contract. This has been the accepted rule ever since this case was decided in the 1820s.

Issue 1 Question (5 points):

Should moral obligations be adequate consideration for contracts? Why or why not? Regardless of your answer, give an example of a situation in which a moral obligation could serve as adequate consideration for a contract.

Issue 2:

Punitive damages are damages that exceed actual compensation for losses suffered as a result of legal harm (the breach of K in K case.) Punitive damages are intended to punish the wrongdoer (the breaching party in K cases.) Punitive damages are almost never granted in contract cases because a contract is simply a civil relationship between two parties. If the contract is breached, the court will compensate one of the parties for the breach, but will not penalize the breaching party unless they have behaved very, very badly and/or unfairly in the contractual relationship.

Issue 2 Question (5 points):

In order to decrease the incentive for people to breach contracts, should punitive damages be used more often as a remedy in contract law? Why or why not? Regardless of your answer, describe a situation in which punitive damages might reasonably be considered an appropriate remedy for breach of contract.