quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

You explain how it is an enforceable contract, remember, until death do us part, there shylock, how do you get your pound of flesh on non-performance,  and try and use actual law rather than asswipe rantings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

When is contractual language ever crystal clear and simple?

Contractual language is purposefully designed to obfuscate and mislead.

How many contracts do you enter into without reading all the fine print?

Do you sit at the car rental counter at the airport going over every detail of the agreement you are about to sign?

Before you use that new credit card do you go through all the terms and limitations line-by-line?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn



Hello zenny.

Sorry, it's been so long since I read about this, before the internet came along.

I think the magazine "Anti-Shyster Lawyer" published by Al Adask may have been the place I saw it. Years ago, as I say, not sure if that's even around anymore.

But in any case, do a search with "threat duress coercion" and you should find more about it. That's what 'TDC' stands for.

Using that for a search, I found this, which is pretty good at explaining the concept and some real cases where the use of it sometimes worked, sometimes didn't, but it's written by a state AG, so it should be authoritative enough:

https://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/1999/htm/jc0153.htm

S U M M A R Y 'The words "forced to sign under threat, duress and coercion" or "non assumpsit to the contents of this document" written under a person's signature on a state document may indicate that the person signing has not agreed to the terms of the document, and consequently that there has been no "meeting of the minds" that is necessary to form a binding agreement.'



But read the whole thing, where the "meeting of the minds" concept and how that relates to contracts is explained.