WOOD V. LUCY, LADY DUFF-GORDON
222 N.Y. 88, 118 N.E. 214 (1917)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Wood (P) sought review of a judgment which reversed the trial court's order denying a motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by Lucy (D) fashion designer and which granted the motion. P asserted that D was bound by an implied contract.
FACTS: Lucy (D) gave Wood (P) an exclusive right to endorse designs with her name and to market and license all of her designs. The contract required that they evenly split all profits from P's sales. The exclusive right was to last at least for one year and was renewable on a year-to-year basis and terminable with 90-day notice. The contract stated that P had an organization capable of performing, but there was no express clause that P would perform. D placed endorsements on clothes without P's knowledge and in violation of the contract. P sued D. The trial court denied D's motion for a judgment on the pleadings. The intermediate appellate court reversed that ruling; the contract lacked mutuality as P never promised to do anything. P appealed the dismissal of the complaint. D claimed that the agreement lacked the elements of a contract; P was not bound to do anything.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment