38

No, the clause is correct. The reason it is put in is to protect the designer from the client's mistakes (or lies) about whether the material the client wants to use is copyrighted. To see how this works, suppose the client gives the designer a photo, and says she has the rights to it. It turns out the client doesn't have rights, and the true owner sues. The ...


35

being overtime-exempt means they're not required to pay me time & 1/2 for overtime, but they're not prohibited from doing so correct? No, the employer is not prohibited from paying you time & 1/2 for overtime. Nor is the employer doing you a favor with respect to the overtime you have been paid already. The employer looks foolish by telling you &...


33

united-states Totally legal, as long as whatever you're forbidding isn't a protected class (race, gender, etc.—the details vary by jurisdiction), or, to some degree, a pretense for one. A real-life example comes via a feud between two artists: Stuart Semple and Anish Kapoor. For reasons that are not particularly relevant to this explanation (other than ...


25

If an offer is accepted, you have a contract Oral contracts are binding for most transactions. See What is a contract and what is required for them to be valid? However, from the circumstances, it’s not clear that there was an offer subject to acceptance. Had the wages been agreed? The hours of work? The annual leave? The sick leave? If these were ...


24

In General Generally speaking, applying common law principles, no. In the case of a relative or friend or neighbor or someone like that, doing a favor for a business does not create a legally enforceable right against a business or business owner. Contract Claims The question assumes that there is not true express contract, or even really a contract to pay ...


17

Is it legal to redefine a term against common sense in a contract? Generally speaking, yes. What matters is that the contract be clear enough for the parties to be aware of the terms and conditions to which they are committing. Both of the scenarios you outline seem lawful. They are binding to the extent that the definitions & language therein duly ...


15

Yes, but ... It doesn’t protect you. Let’s imagine you put such a clause in and a person in Europe used your service notwithstanding: they’ve broken the contract but you’ve broken the law. You get the fine and they get ... nothing. Because you can’t contract outside the law you never had a valid contract with them so you have no basis to sue. Further, ...


12

An agreement to agree is void There is a multitude of case law on this point. If the NDA was not available to you when you signed the employment contract and the term was couched as you describe; then the term would be unenforcable. That is, your employment contract would be binding except for that term i.e. you could not be compelled to sign the NDA. Now,...


11

"at their own request" is referring to design elements that the Client (customer) wants in the product. That could include particular fonts, a photograph, etc. If the designer wants to use a particular font in the product but was not asked for that particular font by the Client, the designer will make sure to obtain any copyright permissions.


11

Is it legal to have an "anti exclusive" contract? Yes. In general this legally equivalent to, and more efficient than, drafting a version for each imaginable type of entity with whom the offeror would be willing to enter a contract. RyanM's answer points out the exception where such clauses would be unlawful. But in the software scenario you ...


10

Consideration Consideration is essential on both sides of every simple common law contract (civil law is different). It is the quid pro quo or "something for something" that is the essence of a contract - it's what turns an unenforcable agreement into a contract. A formal contract supported by a deed does not need consideration. The rules of consideration ...


10

A severability clause means that any clause in the contract which is itself illegal, or which would make the contract illegal, or otherwise cannot be enforced according to the relevant law, is instead excluded from the contract as if it didn't exist. This is an extremely common clause, especially where the contract is used in the same form across multiple ...


10

Yes, they owe you time and a half. But, and it's a big BUT: If the contract lets them fire you, then they can just fire you. So, depending on whether they can let you go, what they're really saying might be, "We can't undo the time and a half we gave you in the past. Going forward, do you want to forfeit the overtime pay, or be let go?"


10

There is no significance to using the words "I" or "we", nor does it matter that you didn't sign the surrender paper (after al, you did not have possession of the vehicle and it is not yours to surrender). You will have gotten a notice, at the beginning of this process (when the loan was taken out) that provides information like this, in ...


9

No Governments have sovereign power. Subject to constitutional and legislative constraints, governments can change laws as they wish. That includes legislative changes and administrative policies. Most governments tend not to use this power arbitrarily because it tends to make investors wary - economists call this sovereign risk. Like any other risk, the ...


9

Can a clause be added to a terms of use that forbids use of the service if the terms of use would be illegal in the user's jurisdiction? Yes, but that is redundant because contracts --or portions thereof-- which contravene the law are null and void. let's say one term of use states that information collected may be retained forever, which is not possible ...


9

Apparently "alienation of affection" is still a tort in Hawaii, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota and Utah. The assumption originally behind alienation of affection this is that one spouse (most usually the wife) belongs to the other and a third party stole them from the other (husband). This is now archaic, sexist, thinking ...


8

When your company breaks a law, then that's first and foremost a matter between your company and the legal authorities. Your company might have to pay a fine to the government, you might lose some licenses, a couple people might even go to prison, etc.. But none of that benefits your customer in any material way. But when they put your obligations to comply ...


8

In most jurisdictions a message sent by email is now legally the same as one sent on paper by, say, postal mail, and a name typed at the end, or other indication of source is the legal equivalent of a physical signature. You are probably in the same legal position yu would have been in if you had written, signed, and sent by post a letter of acceptance.


7

No. The government generally has no duty to protect private citizens from each other. It was different facts but basically the same question in DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. DSS, 489 U.S. 189 (1989), where the Supreme Court held: A State's failure to protect an individual against private violence generally does not constitute a violation of the Due Process ...


7

In principle, oral contacts are binding, but your example has several issues that make it quite poor: in many states in the US, employment is 'at will' which means it can be terminated at any time for any or no reason. So you 'enforcing' the employment contract is only binding for the second it takes to say 'you're fired'. second, recording a conversation ...


7

No. This is a trivial example of how the intention to create legal relations doctrine works: in family/friends/social context there is presumption of no intention to create legal relations unless there are explicit proofs of existence of such intention (e.g. a written agreement). Can the favor-doer later-on sue the business owner for money for it? Anyone ...


6

What is the meaning of notwithstanding in this context? The clause that starts with "notwithstanding" narrows down the levels of studies that are eligible for payment by the Trustee(s). In other words, for purposes of payment of benefits, "education" can be interpreted only as "undergraduate and graduate study", and thus it overrides --only pursuant to that ...


6

Let's go through the checklist. Assume for the purpose of discussion that Alice is a woman and Bob is a man, so that the pronouns are unambiguous. Intention to create legal relations is excused by definition in the question, without this there cannot be a contract. Agreement can be clear from both conduct and from speech. Alice in making the offer verbally ...


6

All your work is yours. They've made it very clear it wasn't a work for hire, so it's yours. They can't copyright any of their ideas. You can't copyright an idea. Only specific creative elements authored by them and present in your work could be covered by copyright. You didn't use their block diagrams. I don't see how references to other sites to look at ...


6

In what way is the mark you made not your acceptance of the contract? It doesn’t matter if it’s your name, or someone else’s name, or an X or the Bluetooth logo or a caricature of Donald Trump. You made it - it’s your signature.


6

Much, if not all, of what you describe already exists in many companies. This mostly takes place in the company's HR department, more serious matters are escalated to a board of directors, and nothing prevents the company from suing the employee in an actual court. The sued, penalized, or terminated employee may establish that the company departed from its ...


6

No, New York would have jurisdiction. NY CPLR § 302 (2012) (New York's "long-arm statute") states that: As to a cause of action arising from any of the acts enumerated in this section, a court may exercise personal jurisdiction over any non-domiciliary, or his executor or administrator, who in person or through an agent: transacts ...


5

Force Majeure An event like the current Covid-19 event is what is known as a force majeure event; a Latin term meaning "superior force". It refers to an event that is beyond the control of the parties to a contract such as war, civil disturbance, acts of God and disease. Common law jurisdictions In common law jurisdictions (most of the English-speaking ...


5

If the party to whom the offer letter is issued fails to take any step towards fulfilling its end, can it be argued that there was no meaningful acceptance as for all intents and purposes, no part of the offer that was 'accepted' has been performed? There was acceptance — the successful bidder communicated its acceptance to the government body and therefore ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible