please help answer 2.

1. 19-2 - Miller V. McDonald's page 380 2. 19-3 Detroit Lions v. Argovitz page 382 1. THE FACTS OF THE CASE 2 THE ISSUE AT THE LAW THE COURT IS CONSIDERING 3. HOW THE LAW WAS APPLIED IN THIS CASE 4. CONCLUSION OF THE COURT-To review how to brief a case please see the end of chapter 1 of your text book for a sample. SAMPLE CASE SUMMARIES ARE IN THE ANNOUNCEMENTS. Pay careful attention to the instructions on briefing a case as this is the format that is required for all chapters this semester. Always cite and and all references that you use to complete the assignmentsil Part 3 Agency 382 19-3 apent for another CASE Fiduciary Duty DETROIT LIONS, INC. v. ARGOVITZ Lined Sue Du Court of Michigan 14 of Sumed 6728919 or google.com/+SONS Demascio, I. many times been held that the agent cannot be both Herry Argovitz was employed as an agent of Billy Simsa buyer and seller at the same time nor connect his own professional football player. Early in 1983, Argovitz interests with property involved in his dealings as an informed Sims that he was awaiting the approval of his application for a U.S. Football League franchise in Houston A fiduciary violates the prohibition against self-dealing Sims was unaware, however, of Argovite's extensive owner not only by dealing with himself on his principal's behalt ship Interest in the new Houston Gamblers organization, but also by dealing on his principal's behalf with a thin Meanwhile, during the spring of 1983. Argovite continued party in which he has an interest, such as a partnership is contract negotiations on behalf of Sims with the Detroit Lions of the National Football League By June 22, Argovia which he is a member Where an agent has an interest adverse to that of his princ and the Lions were very close to an agreement, although Argovite represented to Sims that the negotiations were not pul in a transaction in which he purports to act on behalf of his principal, the transaction is voldable by the principal unless proceeding well. Argovitz then sought an offer for Sim's the agent disclosed all material facts within the agent's know- $3.5 million, five-year deal. Argovitz told Sims that he edge that might affect the principal's judgment. (Citation The mere fact that the contract is fait to the principal does thought the Lions would match this figure, however, he did not seek a final offer from the Lions and then present not deny the principal the right to rescind the contract when the terms of both packages to Sims Sims, convinced that it was negotiated by an agent in violation of the prohibition the Lions were not negotiating in good faith, signed with the against sci-dealing Gamblers on July 1, 1983. On December 16, 1983, Sims Once it has been shown that an agent had an interest in signed a second contract with the Lions. The Lions and Simi a transaction involving his principal antagonistic to the brought an action against Argovitz. seeking to invalidate principal's interest, traud on the part of the agent is pre Sims's contract with the Gamblers on the ground that Argo sumed. The burden of proof then rests upon the agent to vite breached his fiduciary duty when negotiating the con show that his principal had full knowledge, not only of the tract with the Gamblers. fact that the agent was interested, but also of every material fact known to the agent which might affect the principal The relationship between a principal and agent is fiduci and that having such knowdedge, the principal freely any in nature, and as such imposes a duty of loyalty, good consented to the transaction faith, and fair and honest dealing on the agent Citation It is not sufficient for the agent merely to inform the prin A fiduciary relationship are not only from a formal cipal that he has an interest that conflicts with the principal's principal-agent relationship, but also from informal relation- interest. Rather, he must inform the principal "of all facts ships of trust and confidence (Citations that come to his knowledge that are or may be material or In light of the express agency agreement, and the relation- which might affect his principal's rights or interests or influ- ship between Sims and Argovitz. Argovite clearly owed Sims ence the action he takes Citation. the fiduciary duties of an agent at all times relevant to this Argovita dearly had a personal interest in signing Sims lawsuit with the Gamblers that was adverse to Sims interest-he had An agent's duty of loyalty requires that he not have a per if the Gamblers were profitable, and would incur substantial an ownership interest in the Gamblers and thus would profit sonal stake that conflicts with the principal's interest in a transaction in which he represents his principal. As stated in successful. Since this showing has been made, fraud on Argo personal liabilities should the Gamblers not be financially (citation) vita's part is presumed, and the Gamblers' contract must be (The principal is entitled to the best efforts and rescinded unless Argovia has shown by a preponderance of unbiased judgment of his agent. The law denies the evidence that he informed Sims of every material fact the night of an agent to assume any relationship that is that might have influenced Sims decision whether or not to antagonistic to his duty to his principal, and it has sign the Gamblers' contract 383 Chapter 19 Relationship of Principal and Agent We conclude that Argovitz has failed to show by a pre egregious conduct. The careless fashion in which Argovitz ponderance of the evidence either: (1) that he informed Sims went about ascertaining the highest price for Sims' service of the (material) facts, or (2) that these facts would not have convinces us of the wisdom of the maxim: no man influenced Sims' decision whether to sign the Gamblers can faithfully serve two masters whose interests are in conflict. As a court sitting in equity, we conclude that recision Judgment will be entered for the plaintiffs rescinding the is the appropriate remedy. We are dismayed by Argovitz's Gamblers' contract with Sims. contract