Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: MCI Playing "Switcheroo"
Message-ID: <4412@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 26 Feb 90 18:15:54 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Reply-To: goudreau@larrybud.rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC
Lines: 21
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 129, Message 2 of 9


In article <4229@accuvax.nwu.edu>, Leichter-Jerry@cs.yale.edu writes:
 
> Absolutely.  As a general principle in the law, verbal contracts are
> valid.  (There are exceptions, but they are in very specific
> circumstances and usually by statute.)  Non-lawyers often make the
> mistake of assuming that there is some inherent connection between
> VALIDITY and USEFULNESS.  Yes, a verbal contract is valid - once you
> can prove what was agreed to.  And "prove" means "convince a court".
> The burden of finding a way to convince the court is entirely up to
> you.

Umm -- presumably you're talking about *oral* contracts and their
differences from *written* ones.  Pretty much all contracts, both
written and oral, are verbal (composed of words).


Bob Goudreau				+1 919 248 6231
Data General Corporation		...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau
62 Alexander Drive			goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA