I learned about this case in Business Law 9 years ago. If only Zehmer was drunk, the contract would have NOT been enforceable. In order for a contract to be binding, the three rules have to apply: 1) Parties have to be legal age (18 or over), 2) Parties have to be sober, and 3) Parties have to be sane. Unfortunately, Zehmer lost since he wasn't drunk or intoxicated so much to not understand the contract he executed.
We're studying this in contracts now. I think Z wasn't drunk enough! He had been drinking. The problem is, Lucy was drunk enough that Z's wife told Z that he should drive Lucy home. From that, I think the court inferred that Lucy was worse off than Z. (Be careful with your Christmas drinks, folks!) Also, from what I read, the sobriety standard at the time was "intoxicated to the extent of being unable to comprehend the nature and consequences of the instrument he executed." It sounds like he'd have to have quite the buzz!
That's dark. My teacher proposed us this case and I was astonished with the court's decision. I would arrest Lucy for trying to take the farm from a man he knew for almost 15 years, after having a friendly conversation with him in which both drank and laughed together. This just shows us how much absent of God our "justice" is.
@@dudetocartman So he lost his farm? Who can testify that he was not intoxicated to the point of not being able to comprehend the nature and consequences of the instrument he executed? They didn't have breathalyzer at that time, No blood was withdrawn.
@@letysolis6794Yes, Zehmer lost the farm. From what I remember from learning this case in business law, both parties were at a bar drinking and talking while only having a couple drinks in like a 2 hour window. Because of this, that’s sober enough to understand what the contract was stating. Getting a breathalyzer, urine, or blood wouldn’t matter based on that statement. If it was binge drinking in a shorter time, then a test would be needed. Also, once both parties sign while being old enough, sober, and sane, the contract is valid.
Yes he did. This is my great grandfather. Its pronounced ZEE MER. Lucy was a jerk. My great grandfather owned a huge majority of the land in Dinwiddie county (Mckenney VA) he planned all of this.
i wish this included the full results of the case... aka, the final decision made by the supreme court
I learned about this case in Business Law 9 years ago. If only Zehmer was drunk, the contract would have NOT been enforceable. In order for a contract to be binding, the three rules have to apply: 1) Parties have to be legal age (18 or over), 2) Parties have to be sober, and 3) Parties have to be sane. Unfortunately, Zehmer lost since he wasn't drunk or intoxicated so much to not understand the contract he executed.
We're studying this in contracts now. I think Z wasn't drunk enough! He had been drinking. The problem is, Lucy was drunk enough that Z's wife told Z that he should drive Lucy home. From that, I think the court inferred that Lucy was worse off than Z. (Be careful with your Christmas drinks, folks!) Also, from what I read, the sobriety standard at the time was "intoxicated to the extent of being unable to comprehend the nature and consequences of the instrument he executed." It sounds like he'd have to have quite the buzz!
That's dark. My teacher proposed us this case and I was astonished with the court's decision. I would arrest Lucy for trying to take the farm from a man he knew for almost 15 years, after having a friendly conversation with him in which both drank and laughed together. This just shows us how much absent of God our "justice" is.
What where the result of the appeals court?
Zehmer lost since he wasn't intoxicated to the point of not being able to comprehend the nature and consequences of the instrument he executed.
@@dudetocartman So he lost his farm? Who can testify that he was not intoxicated to the point of not being able to comprehend the nature and consequences of the instrument he executed? They didn't have breathalyzer at that time, No blood was withdrawn.
@@letysolis6794Yes, Zehmer lost the farm. From what I remember from learning this case in business law, both parties were at a bar drinking and talking while only having a couple drinks in like a 2 hour window. Because of this, that’s sober enough to understand what the contract was stating. Getting a breathalyzer, urine, or blood wouldn’t matter based on that statement. If it was binge drinking in a shorter time, then a test would be needed. Also, once both parties sign while being old enough, sober, and sane, the contract is valid.
So, did Lucy never take possession of the farm?
Yes he did. This is my great grandfather. Its pronounced ZEE MER. Lucy was a jerk. My great grandfather owned a huge majority of the land in Dinwiddie county (Mckenney VA) he planned all of this.
@@ozehmer how can we get what was 1st instant court argument?
@@ozehmer Yea, Lucy waited until they were intoxicated. All of it seemed planned! He was no friend!
@@ozehmer That's really cool! It's a very famous case. Many first-year law students study it.
What was Lucy's first name?