this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
87 points (96.8% liked)

News

23014 readers
2 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just heard about this last night on the WAN show. That's just nuts.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (3 children)

While the novelty of accepting a contract through emojis is pretty goofy, judges applying contract law to hold people to commercial promises like this is otherwise a pretty run-of-the-mill thing, even when the promise was over text.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

I think the key was he had done it a few times before. Only difference being an "ok" message and a thumbs up emoji.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Until fairly recently, hand signals was the main way of buying and selling stocks!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It's a little wild that they're going to bind contracts by text. Last thing I need is someone replying for me because I'm busy, and now I'm in a contract.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The crux of the case was the defendant had previously accepted contracts via text message with responses like "ok", "yup", and "looks good". All of those contracts were successfully completed.

IMO he was looking to back out of the contract because he could get $41 / bushel instead of the $17 that was in the contract.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

"We've done business before without actual contracts, so we should always be able to." Sounds like bad businessmen to me.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem is that he had set the precedent. If you have the clear precedent that the text is only acknowledging that the contract is ready for you to look over then the judge would've likely ruled the other way.

If you're diligent that you always properly actually sign the contracts, that you're never giving final confirmation by way of a one word text. Then it's unlikely you'd get legally binding in this situation.

Besides, in this case the farmer was definitely in the wrong. He was trying to pull a sneaky because the cash price was over double the contract price at time of delivery. It wouldn't be any different if he had properly signed the contract except that he couldn't try the "but I never actually signed it" excuse.

He should've just ate the contract cancelation fee if he wanted to ride the crazy price. Plenty of other people did just that and there was minimal legal shenanigans involved.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think people need to have notorized signatures for it to be a legally binding agreement. He should be free to change his mind on anything that doesn't have his notorized signature, regardless of the past.

This is the price of casual business dealing, and many people have had to eat it in order to learn.

Always get things in writing. A notorized signature for all important business dealings.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Then you thought wrong. The vast majority of the time notarized signatures are unnecessary. Adding that as a base requirement of all legal contracts is a terrible idea. Did you get a notarized signature last time you bought or sold your car (either with a dealership or privately). Because if not then you already failed to meet that standard.

I agree that letting things get so casual as to start "signing" by text is a bad thing. Handshake agreements are things you do with your neighbors, not with large businesses. But requiring a notary for every contract is going too far in the other direction.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As a counterpoint, it would be quite unfair for the law to allow people to breach their agreements purely based on the medium used to enter into an otherwise valid contract.

E.g., what if the non-breaching person had invested considerable time or money complying with their end of the bargain in reliance on the promise? What if, as I understand the case was here, the parties completed multiple agreements over text and came to rely on that medium as the convention?

In any event, the analysis leaves a lot of room for a judge to consider the factual background and reach a fair outcome.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You can breach any 'agreement' that doesn't have your notorized signature on it. Telling someone you're going to do something is not a legally binding agreement.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Signatures don't need to be notarized to be legally binding.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No they don't. You don't know what you are talking about. Plenty of non-notorized contacts, including verbal only agreements, have been enforced by the courts.

Just a few sources among a thousand or so:

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/small-business/do-contracts-need-to-be-notarized-or-witnessed/

https://www.upcounsel.com/does-a-contract-have-to-be-notarized-to-be-legal#:~:text=In%20general%2C%20there%20is%20no,attest%20to%20the%20person's%20signature.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Mate, in basically all common law jurisdictions an agreement can be a legally binding contract regardless of its form. While there are some narrow exceptions (largely dealing with specific instruments or real property), by and large that rule holds. Even an oral contract is legally enforceable.