Essay about A Home for the Buccaneers

Submitted By Drill2008
Words: 753
Pages: 4

It’s a deal. These words sound pretty easy when trying to buy something is as easy as well, saying “It’s a deal”. However what happens when someone is not content by what they bought or how the end result does not work out in their favor. Many contracts exist and people get overwhelmed by all the legal jargon that goes into making some of these contracts up. Contract are there to help a transaction go smooth but choosing what kind of contract works best for you is a matter of interpretation, because if a contract works for one person this does not mean it will work for another. Finally once a contract is complete and everything is signed by both parties are you bound by what you have done or are there some way you can adjust the contract even though it has been finalized. Well the Dunn Company is in a bind that is a prime example of a contract gone badly. The situation in this instance is the City of Tampa is trying to sue the Dunn Company for failing to complete the new Buccaneers stadium in the time allotted; the contract stated that time was of the essence. However Dunn Company states that Tampa City did not provide the safety details that were need to complete the stadium in time. The information is very limited and vague to what was actually written or orally agreed upon. First and foremost the type of contract has to be taken into account. If it was a verbal contract the things to consider are the terms and if they were within the statute of frauds. If so the contract is not enforceable since the time to make a stadium would more than likely take one year and cost over 500 dollars. Thus the Dunn Company would not have to pay anything for completing the stadium two months late. On the other hand if the oral contract later became a written contract and was agreed by both parties before the construction began then the terms can be enforced. Also, if the oral contract did not become a written contract but was partially executed then it would have to fall under the rule of doctrine of Part Performance, which would make the oral contract a binding contract since it is obvious the Dunn Company knew it agreed to do something for the city or else why would they performing that work, in this instance they might have to pay.
In most cases the Dunn Company may be liable for not going with the terms of the contract. In some instances depending on the type of contract the city may be liable for wages lost to the Dunn Company and its employees because the city did not provide all the necessary tools to complete the job. In such an instance the Dunn Company could claim in good faith that everything was done on their part to complete the Stadium. If