Hello Counsel Jenny! Its Tanatswa again. The precedent in the case of Skeate v Beal is now old law. That case was citicized by the case of Maskell v Horner where the defendants threatened to close the plantiffs market stall and seize his goods if he did not pay certain toll fees. In fact the claim for the toll fees was not supported by law. When the plantiff paid the toll fees that he was made to pay the courts held that duress can apply to goods therefore the contract was voidable so it was set aside.

Thanks for these wonderful, Jenifer. These videos are brilliant. Priceless. Reminds me of my University years...but much more fun. Much success. Yoan.

Thanks so very much for these sessions. Exam in 1 week... so using the sesions for review. Blessings.

I have a state (Indiana) that systematically will pull me into situations in which my expiration date to sue expires over and over again. For example, I tried to bring a federal mediation for a local business to the federal court. I was for some reason unable to get meaningful employment and was even unable to try to start a small business to make ends meet while I was on unemployment. I was sent to CA (a ""friend" invited me to CA because she said there would be jobs there (a cycle of coercion I have been victim to for about 4 years now) and so I went) near the end of the time period after the EEOC granted me the right to sue. So the right to sue expired the week I left CA. During the time in CA I was lead around the city from area to area and given a small job the last days there. So I retuned to IN without the ability to receive mediation from the company (the case was negligence). The woman who was handling my case left the EEOC and was replaced by a man named Bruce Dekker. He was oblivious and not helpful with the EEOC process. I would later find that there were many little cities around IN that were behaving in this manner and they were always referring me to the Prosecuting Attorney. The last time I needed legal help with being inexplicably unemployed I was referred to the PA again and THIS TIME I didn't seek their help and was able to keep a small job on Purdues campus. It it were not for the rights given to me by the University, these groups of lower income white males would still be literally trafficking me from state to state and company to company to use me and not pay me.

yeaah really helpful...shouldve figured earlier!

Actually your videos save my life. Thank you

Synopsis of Employment the situation: An employee has a personal emergency as her minor son had to have emergency surgery. The employee called her Manager to inform her of the matter at hand. The employee promised to keep the manager in the loop as to when she would return to work. The Manager was understanding about the emergency matter and the reason why the parent had to be present at the hospital. As promised the employee kept the manager in the loop as to her return to work timeline. The employee contacts the Manager (1) day after her son' surgery which was her second day out of work, she inquires about the company' position on work life balance allowances. She asked if the company would allow her time off to take her son to get his stitches removed, post-op surgery visits, within the period of the next (2) weeks which could have amounted to (4) additional days off with permission or company approval. The Employer' Branch Manager " informed her that she could use FMLA due to having to care full time for her son", she told her that this would be the only way to protect her job. The employee explained that she didn't want to be off from work she just wanted a work life balance schedule for a very short window of time as she already had family members in place to care for her son on a daily basis for his at home care. The Branch Manager, told her to expect to receive FMLA paperwork via the mail in the next few days and she gave her permission to complete the week of care with her son at home. Fast forward three days later the employee received and intent to terminate letter in the mail instead of andy FMLA paperwork. The paperwork read said that the company did not hear anything from the employee in the last few days they claimed she forfeited her job, unless she wrote in in the next two days. The employee, felt completely blindsided but she immediately wrote in explaining that she was following the specific direction of the Branch Manager and that she had no reason to call in because a plan was already in place. Her letter was ignored and her subsequent calls were ignored so she wrote another letter to the Branch Manager' boss and that letter arrived but was ignored. A week later this same employee receive a letter telling her that she was not eligible for FMLA and that the company put her on an unpaid LEAVE OF ABSENCE. The employee never asked for that. The leave of absence letter did not offer a return to work date so the employee wrote another letter stating that she was confused by all of the recent employment status changes and that she just wanted to get to the bottom line, she wanted someone to call her to explain when she should report back to work. Unfortunately, once again the letter arrived but was ignored. The employee applied for unemployment believing that the Branch Manager follow through with her threat to terminate because no one ever replied to her letters. Also, it was further proof to me that my status had been changed to terminated in that I was not allowed to attend a pre-schedule periodic medical exam at the Corporate Medical Building in my local town, which inhibited the employee from updating her CDL Certification in order for my license to remain valid and legal to drive a school bus. The employee was negatively affected by my Branch Manager' unwarranted actions regarding the frequent status changes that she made. The employee is "actually to date" still working to correct this issue going forward. This has directly affected the employees ability to make an income for her family. This employee, had reason to believe her Branch Manager when she "informed her that she could use FMLA that is why she did not communicate i.e call in everyday with an updated status. That was her boss she should have known if the information that she gave her was factual she had every means to know and or confirm that information as she had authorized access to her personnel records. It turns out that this same Branch Manager Ignored the company' "ATTENDANCE POLICY PROCESS" as she was suppose to confer with the company' [Director of Operations] prior to sending this employee the initial intent to terminate letter, but she usurped her position by not including that person in the decision making process. The employee has loss months and months of wages. This had caused her to lose her seniority in the company, she has suffered Physically as is enduring undue stress because of this situation, and lastly, this employ was only (2) months from her one year tenure at that company which would have made her eligible for FMLA and other privileges available after completing a full year on the job. This Branch Manager, Later stated in an unemployment hearing rebuttal that she made this employee aware that she had many options including FMLA, but that she had to apply for FMLA in order to qualify for it. That is a false statement negated by her initial letter where she makes the statement" " informed her that she could use FMLA due to having to care full time. In this same rebuttal she says" that after getting the employees letter within the time frame of the deadline, I changed her status to FMLA. Well how could that be? She still hadn't applied for FMLA at that juncture so how is it that you now have the authority to put her in that status? In her Rebuttal she goes on to state that she made that change not knowing that the employee wasn't eligible for FMLA and that the employee should be aware of it now, as she recently received a letter informing her that she is not eligible. Unemployment deemed the employee was indeed [DISCHARGED], STATING THAT THE EMPLOYEE WAS OUT ON LEAVE AND NOT ALLOWED TO RETURN TO WORK, IT FURTHER STATED THAT THE EMPLOYEE WAS NEVER WARNED OR WRITTEN UP BEFORE. THEREFORE, THEY CONCLUDED THAT THE CLAIMANT/EMPLOYEE WAS DISCHARGED FOR REASONS OTHER THAN WILLFUL MISCONDUCT. ALTHOUGH SHE WROTE SEVERAL LETTERS ASKING FOR A RETURN TO WORK DATE. AFTER SHE ENDURED (5) SEPARATE HEARINGS THE EMPLOYER PUSHED BACK BUT NEVER SHOWED UP TO PARTICIPATE THEY FINALLY SUBMITTED A WITHDRAWAL LETTER FOR THE LAST HEARING. The Employer also sent out a Leave of Absence return to work letter (2) days prior to the scheduled hearing date, the letter listed an exact date that the employee was expected to have returned to work. This date was never listed in the initial leave of absence letter dated March 8, 2016. If I the employee was originally given a 90 day leave from the date of that letter her return date would have been in June 2016 and not July 2016, as noted on the letter dated July 19, 2016. This mysterious unsigned letter materialized (2) days before the final hearing with a return to work date of July 11, 2016, this letter also threatens to termination if I don't respond by July 29, 2016, well after it was determined and confirmed that by collected evidence that the employee was indeed DISCHARGED BY HER FORMER COMPANY AND NOT INVITED BACK. END:

Thank you angel of God.

hi jenifer, can you upload new topics for some tipe of void contracts with ilustrations

Your lectures are excellent

please upload all the part 2s

Thank you Jenifer for the videos, they are helpful

What if you entered into a contract without disclosing internal misgivings or borderline panic attacks etc. Could this ever become a case? Thanks

really good video.

If someone have fraudulently made a agreement with my signature what kind or action can I take as it relates to contract law.. They purchase land form me and they didn't pay out a balance of 2000 an then created a agreement that I never signed...accn now files a case against me on court...any advise will be helpful

Thank you 🙌🏾

helpful

please display important points in writing -amarjit advocate delhi high court --india

Albania's city

Let's say you go to jail. Let's say you have a very important job where lot of people are counting on you daily for your expertise. While in jail your job and the people that depend on you every day are starting to lose faith in you and don't think you are a reliable source to handle their affairs. So you then get a bond so you are released to go back to your job. The reason for arrest is a victimless crime nobody was harmed the only victim is you because of the harrassment and detainment you have had to deal with. When you are released from jail it's common knowledge that you have to stay in touch with the bond company. So you sign your name to the release papers and go back to your life. 4 days later you get a call from a probation officer asking why you havnt reported to them yet and that there is a condition of bond that you signed per leaving the jail that has you in an agreement to report to probation and random drug screening. To your knowledge you never agreed to this and nobody has told you of this condition of bond. Not even the bondsman told you of this. Would this be duress? Being in jail is a very stressful situation for anybody and if your have a job that is very demanding and the urgency to be released is intimate. Without knowing you signed something and nobody explaining this condition of bond can you still be legally bound to that contract?