• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ga. Man Must Pay $50,000 After Breaking Engagement to Fiancee, Appeals Court Says

Cool, whenever you ask me a question in the future and I dont answer, it means I see zero value in your post and it's not worth my time answering.

Cool with me hon. You know, that is form of intent of action. Just so you know. :lol:
 
Oof, yeah, I run into clients like that, who refuse to put any commitments or statements of intent into writing because they're afraid of being held to their word, always sure to keep an exit door propped open. I immediately push them into my "difficult client and probably not trustworthy" basket.

Really, you have to keep an exit door propped open these days or else the law can very well kick you in the head. It's a shame, but that is the way the world is. Sorry that I have to be weaselly just to be free from state coercion, but well, I do.
 
cool with me hon. You know, that is form of intent of action. Just so you know. :lol:

well people do change their minds. I don't really like the law coming down on me because i changed my mind. If there is no contract there is nothing to enforce. It's that simple.


roflmao

14 yrs old had to be a gross overestimate.
 
Really, you have to keep an exit door propped open these days or else the law can very well kick you in the head. It's a shame, but that is the way the world is. Sorry that I have to be weaselly just to be free from state coercion, but well, I do.

That's fine in principle, so what you'd want to do is state up front what conditions you'd be unable to meet your end of the agreement. That way everybody knows where they stand. The problem isn't keeping an exit door open, it's in being sneaky about it. I don't know what you do for a living but in my field if I behaved like that I'd eventually create a pretty bad reputation and nobody would work with me.
 
Cool, whenever you ask me a question in the future and I dont answer, it means I see zero value in your post and it's not worth my time answering.

It's why I never answer any of his questions
 
That's fine in principle, so what you'd want to do is state up front what conditions you'd be unable to meet your end of the agreement. That way everybody knows where they stand. The problem isn't keeping an exit door open, it's in being sneaky about it. I don't know what you do for a living but in my field if I behaved like that I'd eventually create a pretty bad reputation and nobody would work with me.

It's not just a fine principle, but the only principle to have if you want to be safe from the law. I don't know if I would call it sneaky as much as I would call it keeping potential risks under control. It might appear sneaky I guess, but it's really not. The law can create dishonest men out of honest men though.
 
It's not just a fine principle, but the only principle to have if you want to be safe from the law.

I've been doing business as an independent contractor since I was in my mid twenties and I can recall lying only once. It was a stupid, clumsy, unnecessary lie and while it fortunately wasn't followed up on, if it had been there's no possibility that I could have talked my way out of it. Otherwise, no lies, no sneakiness. It's not necessary and it's not worth the damage to your reputation. And before you say the equivalent of "nice guys finish last," it's not like that at all. While I may not lie or use sneakiness, I'm still practically never screwed over because I've learned how to cover my bases very, very well. Being a good business person is about being confident, reliable and thorough, NOT getting one over on the other guy and focusing solely on covering your own ass. If you believe differently, you're doing it wrong and I'm sorry you never had any mentors to show you a different way.
 
I hope she died a horrible painful death penniless and unloved because she was a gold digging whore and a parasite.

Cooper or Trilola?
 
It's why I never answer any of his questions

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that last one went right over his head....some people cant view their own actions (or words) objectively at all.

It was pretty funny tho, the irony.
 
Well people DO change their minds. I don't really like the law coming down on me because I changed my mind. If there is no contract there is nothing to enforce. It's that simple.

ROFLMAO!

Oh the irony.
 
Triola. I hope her cancer was nighmarishly painful and she died a slow death.

Well, that sounds like a tempered and moderate view.
 
Well people DO change their minds. I don't really like the law coming down on me because I changed my mind. If there is no contract there is nothing to enforce. It's that simple.

It seems as though there was a contract as determined by a judge. Isn't that a reasonable role for a judge to arbitrate between two civil parties?
 
That's been around forever. Do you think it's right that a couple get engaged, set a wedding date, plan their wedding, one of them puts down deposits all over hell and gone for their big day . . . and then the other cancels and thinks they ought to just walk away?

I don't.

I missed that part of the story, is that what happened?
 
I missed that part of the story, is that what happened?

No, it was a clearer example of breach of promise damages. Actually, Sangha pointed out that the award had nothing to do with breach of promise and everything to do with "her share of the house."
 
I've been doing business as an independent contractor since I was in my mid twenties and I can recall lying only once. It was a stupid, clumsy, unnecessary lie and while it fortunately wasn't followed up on, if it had been there's no possibility that I could have talked my way out of it. Otherwise, no lies, no sneakiness. It's not necessary and it's not worth the damage to your reputation. And before you say the equivalent of "nice guys finish last," it's not like that at all. While I may not lie or use sneakiness, I'm still practically never screwed over because I've learned how to cover my bases very, very well. Being a good business person is about being confident, reliable and thorough, NOT getting one over on the other guy and focusing solely on covering your own ass. If you believe differently, you're doing it wrong and I'm sorry you never had any mentors to show you a different way.

Reputation in business is EVERYTHING.
 
That's been around forever. Do you think it's right that a couple get engaged, set a wedding date, plan their wedding, one of them puts down deposits all over hell and gone for their big day . . . and then the other cancels and thinks they ought to just walk away?

I don't.

Actually I do. Unless you sign on the dotted line, or say I do, there is no contract. There is an expectation that you will follow through, but expectation is NOT a guarantee. Its like buying a house. Unless you sign the contract it aint a done deal, hence why good faith money ect is often required, along with other contracts.
 
Actually I do. Unless you sign on the dotted line, or say I do, there is no contract. There is an expectation that you will follow through, but expectation is NOT a guarantee. Its like buying a house. Unless you sign the contract it aint a done deal, hence why good faith money ect is often required, along with other contracts.

If you make a promise to someone and they rely on it to their financial detriment, a court may find that your promise was indeed a contract and find you liable for damages. That's the law. What you think it should be is something else again.

Are there any instances in which a contract could exist even though the parties did not complete the deal?

If one party makes a statement or a promise that causes another party to rely on that statement in such a way that he or she is financially injured by that reliance, then a court will enforce the statement or promise as if it was a completed contract. The court does not need to find an agreement or consideration in order to enforce the promise like a contract.

- See more at: When Will a Promise or Statement Be Considered a Binding Contract? - FindLaw

When Will a Promise or Statement Be Considered a Binding Contract? - FindLaw

Edit: Re your example of buying a house: To my knowledge, buying and/or selling real estate is the only​ contract that must be in writing to be enforced.
 
It seems as though there was a contract as determined by a judge. Isn't that a reasonable role for a judge to arbitrate between two civil parties?

What contract? Sorry, but what we are talking about is NOT a contract. A promise or statement to do something is NOT a contract.
 
It seems as though there was a contract as determined by a judge. Isn't that a reasonable role for a judge to arbitrate between two civil parties?

As Sangha pointed out earlier, if you read the thread, you'll see she was awarded that money as her share of the house -- not for breach of contract.
 
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that last one went right over his head....some people cant view their own actions (or words) objectively at all.

It was pretty funny tho, the irony.

You do realize the second comment was a joke, right? I was making fun of the concept being talked about here.
 
As Sangha pointed out earlier, if you read the thread, you'll see she was awarded that money as her share of the house -- not for breach of contract.

No need to be snarky. Just because Sangha said it and you repeat it twice, doesn't make it accurate. From the story: "Smith said he believes the trial judge's monetary award was derived from about half the value of the home that Kelley purchased, which was worth around $86,000." If you have other details, I'd be interested to see it.

Sorry, but that seems like an opinion to me, not a statement from the trial judge. Also, half of $86,000 is not $50,000. The trial judge made a ruling as he determined based on some level agreement between the two civil parties. People can choose to agree or disagree with the opinion (after all, that's what we do here), but that doesn't change the results.
 
Back
Top Bottom