A person, GF joined a university, KS as a head coach for men’s basketball team with a five-year contract and with a salary of &&#35;36;300,000. In case of breach of contract by GF, he will be liable to pay liquidity damages that will be equal to the salary received by him multiplied by the number of years remaining for the expiry of the contract. GF left the college four years before the termination of the contract. GF joined another university B at a salary of &&#35;36;700,000. University KS filed a suit in Ohio state court, against GF. The court enforced the liquidity damages clause and awarded the university &&#35;36;1.2 million. GF appealed arguing that the liquidity damage clause was an unenforceable penalty. To explain: The impact of the record of the basketball team on the decision of the court.

Question

Want to see the full answer?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 13, Problem 1CT

Summary Introduction

Case summary:A person, GF joined a university, KS as a head coach for men’s basketball team with a five-year contract and with a salary of &#36;300,000. In case of breach of contract by GF, he will be liable to pay liquidity damages that will be equal to the salary received by him multiplied by the number of years remaining for the expiry of the contract. GF left the college four years before the termination of the contract. GF joined another university B at a salary of &#36;700,000. University KS filed a suit in Ohio state court, against GF. The court enforced the liquidity damages clause and awarded the university &#36;1.2 million. GF appealed arguing that the liquidity damage clause was an unenforceable penalty.

To explain: The impact of the record of the basketball team on the decision of the court.

Expert Solution & Answer

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution

See solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Define the term "remedies" in the context of business law.

Regarding legality, the first right granted to minors in contract law cases is the right to dis-affirm. How would you "standardize or structure" the following rule of law regarding dis-affirming for minors? In its current state, it appears to be clear as mud! "Dis-affirming occurs when the minor states, either in a verbal declaration or by their actions, that they no longer intend to be bound by the terms of the contract to which they are a party. Upon reaching the age of majority, the minor may choose to disaffirm the contract they were entered into while in the minority. If they do not disaffirm the contract within a reasonable period of time, they are considered to have ratified the contract."

Briefly, what are the alternatives to suing someone in court to enforce your legal rights, and why would you consider them? What are the three main methods in which the doctrine of precedent operates within a legal system?