Bloomer girl revisited or how to frame an unmade picture

Wisconsin Law Review

Volumn 1998, Issue 4, 1998, Pages

  Goldberg, Victor P ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347038937     PISSN: 0043650X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
2. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
3. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
4. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
5. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
6. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
7. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
8. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
9. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
10. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
11. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
12. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
13. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
14. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
15. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
16. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).
17. See Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 474 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1970). It is the opening case in 1 STEWART MACAULAY ET AL., CONTRACTS: LAW IN ACTION 51 (1995). Other casebooks that reprint it as a main case include STEVEN J. BURTON, PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACT LAW 318 (1995); THOMAS D. CRANDALL & DOUGLAS J. WHALEY, CASES, PROBLEMS, AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 371 (2d ed. 1993); JOHN P. DAWSON ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND COMMENT 45 (7th ed. 1998); E. ALLAN FARNSWORTH & WILLIAM F. YOUNG, CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 508 (5th ed. 1995); LON L. FULLER & MELVIN ARON EISENBERG, BASIC CONTRACT LAW 266 (6th ed. 1996); AMY HILSMAN KASTELY ET AL., CONTRACTING LAW 1016 (1996); JAMES F. HOGG & CARTER G. BISHOP, CONTRACTS: CASES, PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS 496 (1997); IAN R. MACNEIL, CONTRACTS: EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS AND RELATIONS 132 (2d ed. 1978); ARTHUR ROSETT, CONTRACT LAW AND ITS APPLICATION 375 (5th ed. 1994); ROBERT E. SCOTT & DOUGLAS L. LESLIE, CONTRACT LAW AND THEORY 769 (1988); ROBERT S. SUMMERS & ROBERT A. HILLMAN, CONTRACT AND RELATED OBLIGATION 262 (3d ed. 1997). The following casebooks include a brief excerpt from the decision: ROBERT W. HAMILTON ET AL., CASES AND MATERIALS ON CONTRACTS 23 (2d ed. 1992); CHARLES L. KNAPP & NATHAN M. CRYSTAL, PROBLEMS IN CONTRACT LAW: CASES AND MATERIALS 949 (3d ed. 1993); EDWARD J. MURPHY ET AL., STUDIES IN CONTRACT LAW 894 (5th ed. 1997). JOHN D. CALAMARI ET AL., CASES AND PROBLEMS ON CONTRACTS 610 (2d ed. 1989) does not cite the case, but it uses a simplified version of the facts as a problem. The case does not appear in FRIEDRICH KESSLER ET AL., CONTRACTS: CASES AND MATERIALS (3d ed. 1986).