Question

In 2013, Sierra Nevada Brewing Co., a large craft beer company, was in the midst of constructing a new brewing facility in Mills River, North Carolina near Asheville, North Carolina. During construction, Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.’s marketing staff began working on ways to promote the new facility’s opening ceremony which was scheduled for June 1, 2014. The marketing staff ultimately decided to hire one local artisan to create a unique promotional item to be distributed at the opening ceremony of the new facility. After soliciting ideas from local artisans, the marketing staff decided to hire Jamie Eisenhann, a local blacksmith. Jamie had created a rolled steel beverage coaster emblazoned with the Sierra Nevada logo and the phrase, “Mills River Opening Ceremony, June 1, 2014.” Shortly after the marketing staff decided on Jamie, Seth Gresson, the marketing director for Sierra Nevada Brewing Co., made a telephone call to Jamie and delivered the good news. Seth told Jamie that Sierra Nevada would agree to pay Jamie $10,000 if she would create 500 rolled steel beverage coasters emblazoned with the Sierra Nevada logo and the phrase, “Mills River Opening Ceremony, June 1, 2014.” Jamie immediately accepted the offer, thanked Seth and began work on the coasters. Jamie completed work on the coasters in late February 2014. On March 1, 2014, Jamie made a telephone call to Seth to inform him that the coasters were complete and ready to be picked up. Seth told Jamie that Sierra Nevada had decided to move the opening ceremony for the Mills River facility to September of 2014, and therefore Sierra Nevada did not want the coasters created by Jamie because they contained the wrong date. Subsequently, Jamie filed a lawsuit against Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. seeking damages for breach of contract. Sierra Nevada argues that Jamie’s claim is barred by the Statute of Frauds.

1. What is the primary issue in this fact pattern?

2. What is the rule or rules applicable to determining this issue (explain the rule

   or rules)?

3. Analyze the issue using the applicable rule or rules.

4. What is your conclusion based upon your analysis?

Answer 1

The primary issue is the 'Statute of Frauds' rule. The rule states A statute requiring certain contracts to be in writing and signed by the parties bound by the contract. The purpose is to prevent fraud and other injury.

In this case scenario, the artisan Jamie, just received a call from Seth Gresson, the marketing director of Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. and based on that telephonic discussion, began creating the coasters. In fact, Jamie should have visited the company and signed a proper contract before comencing the work.

In this instance, Jamie could excercise the exception rule which states 'These exceptions are admission, performance, and promissory estoppel. Admission means that an oral contract can be enforced without meeting the requirements of a statute of frauds if the other party admits under oath that the oral contract was made. Performance can mean full performance or partial performance.' and seek damages in lieu of