Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman discuss the doctrine(s) of mistake.

Discussion of the economic duress case S.P. Dunham vs. Kudra.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman debate the meaning of chicken in the 1960 case of Frigaliment Importing vs. BNS.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman discuss the pre-existing duty rule and economic duress in the 1902 case of Alaska Packers vs Domenico.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman discuss a student's claim for rescission on a contract for thousands of hours of dance lessons in the 1968 case Vokes vs. Arthur Murray Dance Studios.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman discuss the prospect of rescission for a contract for dance lessons in Vokes vs. Arthur Murray Dance Studios.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman discuss the Delaware Chancery Court's specific performance analysis in the 2001 case of In re IBP Shareholders Litigation.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman discuss the 2017 unilateral mistake case (with bitcoin!) from the Singapore International Commercial Court, B2C2 Ltd. vs. Quoine Pte Ltd.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman discuss the moral consideration argument in Webb vs. McGowin, and in the earlier case of Mills vs. Wyman.

Professors Tess Wilkinson-Ryan and Dave Hoffman at the University of Pennsylvania discuss the weaponization of Accord and Satisfaction doctrine in the 1971 small claims case of Con Ed vs. Erroll.