Smuler,
If you want the complete legal analysis on the facts of this case, here it is. But keep in mind this is not court and any errors in my analysis are hereby disclaimed.
Sol made an offer to enter into a contract and Ricky accepted the offer. An enforceable oral contract was formed, pursuant to which (arguably) there was no "meeting of minds" on the timing and terms of repayment. However, the failure of the meeting of the minds on this one term is not fatal to the contract, if we can divine from the intentions of the parties what the terms were inferred to be. Furthermore, even if the failure of "meeting of the minds" on one of the principal terms was vague or indefinite, Sol still can recover on an implied contract or based on the equitable legal theory of unjust enrichment.
Ricky, had he not repaid the money, could have asserted a legal defense of failure of consideration due to the consideration (a promise to have sex with an escort and review her) being meretricious and illegal. Ricky's defense fails for the following reasons: (1) the MERB court of law does not recognize the legal validity of such a defense even if a real court of law would; and (2) Ricky, under the doctrine of estoppel, would be precluded from asserting such a defense because he agreed to engage in arguably illegal behavior; and (3) the consideration, if done in an outcall setting, would (arguably) not be meretricious or illegal at all, thus defeating the defense in the first place.
However, Ricky's legal defenses, if any, are moot because he waived them by repaying the money owed under the contract.
Next comes the analysis of Sol Tee Nutz's damages, if any, for the breach of contract. Sol has been repaid. He could argue that he lost the time or interest value of the money. Ricky has a solid defense to this claim as the contract did not provide for interest, attorney's fees, or costs. Therefore judgment enters in favor of Ricky for Sol's claims of further damages on the contract.
With regard to Ricky's counterclaim for defamation/libel, truth is a defense to any cause of action for defamation. I enter judgment in favor of Sol Tee Nutz on the counterclaim. All costs are borne by the parties.
If you want the complete legal analysis on the facts of this case, here it is. But keep in mind this is not court and any errors in my analysis are hereby disclaimed.
Sol made an offer to enter into a contract and Ricky accepted the offer. An enforceable oral contract was formed, pursuant to which (arguably) there was no "meeting of minds" on the timing and terms of repayment. However, the failure of the meeting of the minds on this one term is not fatal to the contract, if we can divine from the intentions of the parties what the terms were inferred to be. Furthermore, even if the failure of "meeting of the minds" on one of the principal terms was vague or indefinite, Sol still can recover on an implied contract or based on the equitable legal theory of unjust enrichment.
Ricky, had he not repaid the money, could have asserted a legal defense of failure of consideration due to the consideration (a promise to have sex with an escort and review her) being meretricious and illegal. Ricky's defense fails for the following reasons: (1) the MERB court of law does not recognize the legal validity of such a defense even if a real court of law would; and (2) Ricky, under the doctrine of estoppel, would be precluded from asserting such a defense because he agreed to engage in arguably illegal behavior; and (3) the consideration, if done in an outcall setting, would (arguably) not be meretricious or illegal at all, thus defeating the defense in the first place.
However, Ricky's legal defenses, if any, are moot because he waived them by repaying the money owed under the contract.
Next comes the analysis of Sol Tee Nutz's damages, if any, for the breach of contract. Sol has been repaid. He could argue that he lost the time or interest value of the money. Ricky has a solid defense to this claim as the contract did not provide for interest, attorney's fees, or costs. Therefore judgment enters in favor of Ricky for Sol's claims of further damages on the contract.
With regard to Ricky's counterclaim for defamation/libel, truth is a defense to any cause of action for defamation. I enter judgment in favor of Sol Tee Nutz on the counterclaim. All costs are borne by the parties.
