Catamount Slate Products Inc V Sheldon Group 4

Catamount Slate Products, Inc. V. Sheldon Group 4 Lizabeth Anderson Hannah Tran Recha Jordon Grangruth Osman Mohammud

The Facts Plaintiffs Sheldons Defendants Catamount Slate Productions Inc.

Map of the quarry Road in question~

Timeline 1997 Sept 7 th 2000 Oct 1 st 2000 Feb 2001 • Two parties Litigating • Mediation • Outline of Settlement Terms • First payment • Memo • Deed and Map • Refusal of payment

Point of View Reed Family � Originally believe the Sheldons owned the access road leading to the Reeds quarry. � Agreed to payment before disbursement � Not bound by a contract

Point of View Sheldons � Claims that they own the road. � Believe the Reeds are enforced to follow contract.

Point of View Trial Court V Supreme Court � The Trial Court: Orally bound in contract � But the Supreme court reversed the decision made in the Trial Court, and preceded without the decision of the Trial Court.

Issues �Miscommunication in the Trial Court � If the oral agreement reached in the Trial Court between the Reed’s and the Sheldons was suffice to pursue that toll? �Misrepresentation of facts: Is the road public or private? �There is no real mutual assent

Legal Concepts Mutual Assent • Communication to offeree • Intent to enter contract • Definite and/or certain terms

Legal Concepts Statute of Limitations • Time period for legal action • "Only final agreement of settlement must be in writting and signed by every party sought to be charge. ”

Legal Concepts Mutual Mistake • Lack of communication • No evidence regarding the Sheldon’s ownership of the road • Reed family did not check the ownership of the road.

Interpretation, Inferences & Conclusion There are many points the court looked upon to find the answers to the main questions in the case. Again the main issues in the case included: � (1) If the oral agreement would suffice � (2) Whether or not the access road leading to the Reeds quarry is subject to a toll, after finding it may be a public highway � (3) Was the agreement was still enforceable because the DEC (Department of Environmental Conservation) could insert these terms into the agreements later? � 4) Lastly step four includes whether or not the contract is typically one to be oral or written.

Implication or Consequences � In the future, the Reeds and the Sheldons should have communicated through writing rather than an oral agreement to ensure all details were mapped out. � The Reeds should not have paid the Sheldons any funds until after a written agreement was finished and bound them both. � The Sheldons should be required to prove the access road is owned by them, if not the Reeds should challenge this to avoid further litigation. �Ultimately, the court should be aware of the ownership, and ask if there is any reason to believe it was not private.