Originally Posted by
colpuck
Mistaken not ignorant. If the facts were different you may get a different outcome.
I don't believe that small print always controls. However, the presumption is that the terms are valid until the Plaintiff proves them invalid. That's where dgcpaphd and Urbanegent hit the wall. In fact the first thing the fare rules tell you is what the class of service is.
Lets look at your TV hypo
You're trying to show when you should get a 64in for a 32in price. it seems that if you have a 64in tv labeled with a 32in price you get it. but that's not what happened here. here you have 64in tv labeled with a 32 in tv model number and price. Now the store says 32in model and delivers and the buyer says it's a 64in tv. it's up to the plaintiff to prove why the box should control over the price sticker.
First, you have your new hypo entirely legally wrong. If a store has a TV and it is a 64in TV, and it has a sign saying "64 tv $600" And I go ok, SOLD!!!! Well that TV is mine, in every state of the union (and DC and PR) and in every common law county. The one exception is with ETOH, which in most states can't be sold under cost by law, so mistakes are not honored.
Second, as others have said, you don't seem to understand the burden of proof. Plaintiff has to prove (has "the burden of proof") that he made a contract to buy a "Business (Z)" ticket. He has ample proof of that (receipt, screen shots, electronic reservations) and at that point he gets the benefit of the bargain, the value to him of the Business class seat. Legally, the measure of his damages
almost always will be the cost to replace the product/service
at the time of breach. That is easy to determine, he is owed what it would have cost him to buy a walk up business seat on AV, had he wiped out his credit card at check in. United then gets a credit for what he paid on the ticket they sold him. Ken had a right of rescission, but he does not want that, he wants the value of performance, which is judged by the "cover" price.
What you have been arguing is that United has a "defense" to the claim. Mutual Mistake is an affirmative defense, and it requires the party trying to void the transaction (the seller in the barren calf case you cited from your 1L contracts case book) to show that BOTH parties thought they were buying something other than what they were.
Where your logic leaves the tracks is in thinking that Ken (the OP) did not think he was buying a Business class ticket, he certainly did, and the defense of mutual mistake is not applicable.
The second place your logic leaves the track is trying to mush together an argument about the item being sold really being a Y ticket (due to small print) into the "mutual mistake" analysis. You can't do this, and as has been repeatedly been shown, what was legally being sold was what was advertised, and what the receipt says is being sold.
A better analogy to your TV hypo is that I am looking at Best Buy for TVs, and Best buy offers a 64" Sony TV for $700. I click buy, and get a receipt saying "64" Sony TV" and my tracking says, and my best buy account says I bought a 64" Sony TV, well that is what I bought. That was the CONTRACT THAT WAS FORMED. Look at the case from the NY Court of Appeals, it is directly on point, lots of services are sold and contracts formed without "inspecting" the property, the contract is by reference to what is sold. Once that contract is made, Best Buy (or United) then claims that it was not what it intended to sell. But that is a mistake on Best Buy (United's) part, and is not a "mutual mistake" and a unilateral mistake does not void a contract.