You Are the Judge

Brigitte Godot was a successful sales representative for International Widgets, Inc., who had entered into contract with P.A. Kettle to buy $20,000 in widgets for his construction company. Mr. Kettle entered into verbal agreement with Brigitte Godot that if he completed the deal within 24 hours, he would get a free trip to Paris. When Ms. Godot failed to live up to her end of the bargain, Mr. Kettle then decided to sue International Widgets, Inc. for breach of contract.

There are several legal questions that must be answered in this case. First, is International Widgets, Inc. required to live up to any promises made by Brigitte Godot? Is International Widgets, Inc. responsible for the actions of a representative of their company? Should Mr. Kettle have asked Ms. Godot additional questions regarding the implied trip to Paris to determine if she meant Paris, France, or Paris, Texas? Where there any witnesses present to hear conversations between Mr. Kettle and Ms. Godot? Should Mr. Kettle have required Ms. Godot to put any verbal agreements into writing before signing any other agreements? Does International Widgets, Inc. look credible when they use unprofessional titles on their business cards? Should Mr. Kettle have taken any verbal promises seriously coming from a company who does use unprofessional titles on their business cards? And lastly, is International Widgets, Inc. truly guilty of breach of contract, since the trip was not guaranteed in writing?

The Plaintiff (A.P. Kettle) is in a position to sue International Widgets, Inc. on the count of intentional misrepresentation as well as breach of contract. Mr. Kettle, or any other reasonable person, would have believed that Brigitte Godot was talking about Paris, France because of the amount of money Mr. Kettle was asked to spend in a single transaction, as well as the time frame restrictions that were put on the deal. Ms. Godot made a false representation of fact, as well as had knowledge that the representation was false and intended to deceive the party [pg.97]. One would not be likely to believe that a large amount of money would buy them a trip to Texas and relied upon Ms. Godot's misrepresentation and entered into a high dollar deal. The burden of proof is on Mr. Kettle to prove that Paris, France was Ms. Godot's intention as well as prove that this is a breach of contract. Because International Widgets, Inc. fired Ms. Godot after learning of the incident with Mr. Kettle, he can argue that Godot was fired because International Widgets agreed that Ms. Godot was wrong by bribing Kettle with a luxury trip.

The Defendant (International Widgets, Inc.) can argue that any promises of gifts or other incentives are not due to the Plaintiff because there are no signed agreements guaranteeing him any such concessions. They can also argue that Brigitte Godot was not in a position to make any promises of gifts or other incentives to anyone who may be purchasing anything from their company. If Mr. Kettle had no witnesses to any promises made by Brigitte Godot, they could say that the conversation never took place. On the other hand, if there were any witnesses present, they could contend that it is their strict policy not to offer any incentives to their consumers, and put the burden back on Brigitte Godot personally.

If I were the