Author Question: The scope of an agent's authority is determined from the: a. oral or written expressions of the ... (Read 64 times)

geoffrey · **on:** Jun 24, 2018

The scope of an agent's authority is determined from the:
a. oral or written expressions of the principal b. principal's conduct
c. standards of the Uniform Agency Act
d. oral or written expressions of the principal or the principal's conduct
e. oral or written expressions of the principal or the principal's conduct or the standards of the Uniform AgencyAct

Question 2

Agreement. The Pittsburgh Board of Public Education in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as required by state law, keeps lists of eligible teachers in order of their rank or standing. According to an Eligibility List form made available to applicants, no one may be hired to teach whose name is not within the top 10 percent of the names on the list. In 1996, Anna Reed was in the top 10 percent. She was not hired that year, although four other applicants who placed lower on the listand not within the top 10 percentwere hired. In 1997 and 1998, Reed was again in the top 10 percent, but she was not hired until 1999. Reed filed a suit in a federal district court against the board and others. She argued in part that the state's requirement that the board keep a list constituted an offer, which she accepted by participating in the process to be placed on that list. She claimed that the board breached this contract by hiring applicants who ranked lower than she did. The case was transferred to a Pennsylvania state court. What are the requirements of an offer? Do the circumstances in this case meet those requirements? Why or why not?

livaneabi · **Reply #1 on:** Jun 24, 2018

Answer to Question 1

d

Answer to Question 2

Agreement
Three elements are necessary for an offer to be effective: (1) the offeror must have a serious intent, (2) the terms of the offer must be reasonably certain or definite, and (3) the offer must be communicated by the offeror to the offeree. In addition to statements that lack seriousness, there are a number of types of expressions that do not qualify as offers under the intent concept. Among these expressions are invitations to negotiate, which include ads and similar solicitations. The Eligibility List form was an invitation to applythe sort of preliminary negotiation that does not amount to an offer. Stating or otherwise indicating a willingness to bargain is not an offer if the person to whom it is addressed knows or has reason to know that the person making it is only expressing the possibility of entering into a contract. Reed met the requirements to be on the list, but the defendants did not express their assent to hire Reed. Also, the purported contract's terms were uncertain. Neither the defendants nor their form specified any of the employment details: the position, the salary, the starting date, the duration, or the benefits. Without definite terms, there is no basis for a court to provide an appropriate remedy. Thus, in this case, because the first two elements of an effective offer were lacking, the defendants did not make an offer, and there was no contract.