The son borrowed a weapon for hunting from his father. Assuming the father received nothing in return then this is a gratuitous bailment for the sole benefit bailee , the son. The bailor, father, only had a duty of care to warn son of known defects. Hence, the son should be more careful with his use.
C received a check in form of a loan from an aunt. After some time the aunt wrote on a Christmas card that states to keep the money with no return. C may argue against her estate, wanting payment for the loan, that the Christmas card sent by his aunt is a gift of forgiveness of the check loan. However, the Christmas card is very vague and doesn't mention the amount of money, it could have been other money that C 's aunt gave him besides the check. In that case, C may still be liable for the loan. In hindsight C should have requested a detailed writing from his aunt for loan forgiveness.
Refer to the case Allright Inc v Schroeder (551 SW2d 745).
1) Plaintiff is suing defendant, operator of parking lot, after plaintiff's car was stolen from their parking lot which closed at 6 pm. The lot had a limitation of liability clause for losses due to theft.
2) Trial court held for plaintiff. Defendant appealed.
Relevant Terms, Laws, and Cases
Limitation of liability clause - provision in contract that limits liability amounts in case of breach of contract.
Appeal court affirmed the decision.
The limitation of liability clause was invalid in this case. The court held that for a bailment of an item, the car, limitation of liability must be notified to owners prior to the bailment. In this case, the ticket which had the clause was not read by plaintiff and a sign that wrote lot closes at 6 pm had did nothing to inform plaintiff of assuming risk of theft.