Connection lost
Server error
Clark v. . West Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: An author breached a sobriety clause in his publishing contract. The court held the publisher could waive this clause—a condition, not the core consideration—without a new agreement, allowing the author to sue for the full contract price based on the alleged waiver.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that a party can waive a condition precedent to performance without new consideration. It distinguishes a waivable condition from the core consideration of a contract, thereby preventing forfeiture where a party has indicated it will not enforce the condition.
Clark v. . West Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff, an author, contracted with Defendant, a publisher, to write a series of law books. The contract provided for payment of $2 per page. A separate clause stipulated that if the plaintiff abstained from using intoxicating liquors during the contract’s term, he would be paid an additional $4 per page. The plaintiff authored a book that the defendant accepted and published. However, the plaintiff admitted he did not entirely abstain from alcohol. The defendant, despite allegedly knowing of the plaintiff’s drinking, paid only the $2 per page rate. The plaintiff sued for the additional $4 per page, alleging that the defendant had expressly waived the total abstinence condition by repeatedly representing that the plaintiff would receive the full payment regardless of his drinking, and that the plaintiff relied on these representations. The defendant demurred to the complaint, arguing the abstinence clause was the consideration for the higher payment and could not be waived without a new, supported agreement.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can a party to a contract waive a condition precedent to its own performance without new consideration, thereby precluding itself from enforcing a forfeiture for the other party’s breach of that condition?
Yes. The court held that the total abstinence clause was a condition Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis au
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Can a party to a contract waive a condition precedent to its own performance without new consideration, thereby precluding itself from enforcing a forfeiture for the other party’s breach of that condition?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the critical distinction between a contract's consideration and its Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nis
Legal Rule
A party may waive a condition precedent to its performance without new Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco l
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on distinguishing between the contract's consideration and its Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliq
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A contract term can be a waivable condition rather than non-waivable