course material

1. Discussion is for business law.
Discussion is for business law.Discussion is for business law 1 Designer Baby (Scalisi vs. NY
Univ. Medical Center, p. 429) Why was the basis of the parent’s argument that they were not
bound by the written contract in the Scalisi et al. v. New York University Medical Center
case? How did the court rule and what was the reasoning for that decision. Do you agree or
disagree. Why or why not? Have you ever entered into an oral contract? Discuss. Rubic For
your initial post
Modules Two through Eight, complete the initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. of your
local
discussion boards from the current module and previous modules, when appropriate (make
sure you are using proper citation methods for your discipline when referencing scholarly
or popular resources). I need it tonight by 11:30 pm est or before. Discussion is for business
law.ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE Business law discussionWhy was the basis
of the parent’s argument that they were not bound by the written contract in the Scalisi et
al. v. New York University Medical Center case?The basis of the parent’s (Scalisi) argument
was that they had an oral contract with the medical facility even before they signed the
written contract. They argued that since they already had an oral contract, the terms agreed
in the oral contract were binding since they preceded the written contract. They further
argued that since the medical facility had breached the oral contract, they were not bound
to follow the terms indicated in the written contract. They explained that the oral contract
included an assurance that they would have a child free of autism if Mrs. Scalisi was
impregnated instead of a surrogate. This was an issue of great concern to the family since
there was a family history of autism thus significantly increasing risk of their child
developing the condition. The oral assurance that their child would not develop the
condition helped in assuring the family (Scalisi Et Al. V. New York University Medical Center
805 N.Y.S.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div., 1st Dept., Dec. 6, 2005)). Discussion is for business law.How
did the court rule and what was the reasoning for that decision?The court ruled to dismiss
Scalisi’s claim that the facility had breached the oral contract. The court reasoned that the
family failed to prove compensatory damages. Also, the court noted that a claim of medical
malpractice could not be entered since Scalisi was unable to prove that the facility had
specially promised a definite result. Besides that, the court noted that the oral contract had
been voided by parole evidence rule that validated the written agreement as the final and
complete version of the agreement, implying that the oral argument was invalid (Scalisi Et

2. Al. V. New York University Medical Center 805 N.Y.S.2d 62 (N.Y. App. Div., 1st Dept., Dec. 6,
2005)). Discussion is for business law.Do you agree or disagree?Why or why not?I agree
with the court’s ruling and argument. That is because of no other reason but the parole
evidence rule. Although the parties may have had an oral contract, the written contract was
prepared at a later date and it included the final and complete version of the terms of the
agreement between the two parties. As such, the oral contract is invalid and the written
contract is valid. Discussion is for business law.Have you ever entered into an oral contract?
Discuss.I have on occasion entered into an oral contract, although this would occur for small
amounts where a written contract is not required. I am always careful to have a written
contract where substantial sums are concerned. Discussion is for business law.