1. House Painting
Jeremy contracted with Samantha to paint her house yellow. The contract said Jeremy would provide all the paint and tools, and Samantha would pay in full on completion
(a) After painting 3 sides, Jeremy got a letter from a university saying he was admitted if he could enroll immediately. Jeremy told Samantha he was finished. Must she pay him? (Bonus: What if she said, “You have not finished, but that’s okay, because I’m short of cash and can only pay you 3/4 of the price anyway,” and paid him? Could she later sue for her money back?)
(b) After painting everything except the trim around one door, Jeremy said he was finished. She said, “You have not finished, so I don’t have to pay anything.” Can Jeremy force Samantha to pay?
2. Tunnel Delays
Foley agreed to build a tunnel five km long for McDonald. After work began, a dispute occurred between them, and all work stopped. The parties made some attempts to resolve the problems, but in the end, Foley notified McDonald on 10 September that Foley was withdrawing from the project. McDonald talked to Foley some more, and they tried again to resolve the problems. Then on 15 October they agreed to treat the contract as terminated, and to take the matter to court. On 8 November, McDonald looked for and then hired another contractor to build the tunnel. The tunnel was finished much later than originally planned. At trial, Foley was not willing to pay damages for the cost of the full delay. What remedies principle or rule should the court consider in deciding this dispute? How might that principle apply to these facts?