Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 8
 Saved my neck in law school--and I enjoyed it, too June 18, 2002
9 out of 10 found this review helpful
When I took Contracts as a first-year law student, I read the cases, went to class, and didn't have the faintest idea what it all meant. It seemed to be a mind-numbing mix of similar facts with different conclusions. Then I read this book and--voila--it all seemed to flow together so cohesively and clearly. And, on top of that, the book is well written, has flashes of humor, and is very short. What a great book this is for any law student.
This is a great book September 9, 2001
J. Smith (Boston, MA)
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
If you are a law student or lawyer or just anyone interested in the law (from a technical perspective) this is a great history of contract. Gillmore is a very entertaining writer and I actually found myself laughing out loud. A working knowledge of Williston, Cardozo, Posner and the seminal cases in Contract law makes this book a lot more fun. You should definitely know your legal history first. Gillmore is not going to help you along.
A Classic Account of the Evolution of Contract Law June 10, 2003
Dino
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
Provides an in depth account of the evolution of contract law. It has aptly been described as an "epic". Law students, lawyers and lay people alike will find this to be intriguing and thought provoking on many levels. Gilmore of course shows how contract law developed, but inquisitive people will also be intrigued at some of the other issues regarding what we think of as law, the development of law and the concept of precedent. In addition to the interesting subject matter, the author's tale is delivered in a wonderfully humorous writing style. Best enjoyed and fully appreciated only after law school. PS
If you're considering tossing around allegations that Yale Law School legend Grant Gilmore's work is "incorrect", consider bolstering your credence by not remaining anonymous.
It is not what you think March 22, 2009
Mary E. Sibley (Carneys Point, NJ USA)
Contract law is abstract. It was developed in the nineteenth century as a generalized theory, a residual category for everything not falling into specialized law in the commercial sphere. The bargain theory of consideration was proposed by Holmes.
When the general theory of contracts was developed by Holmes, (and Williston and Corbin), current cases were used. A contractual trap could not be sprung until the last moment. There had to be mutuality of obligations. In other words, there could be nothing like an agreement to agree.
The general theory of contract was never neat and tidy according to Gilmore. The RESTATEMENT OF CONTRACTS is schizophrenic it is alleged because Williston and Corbin had opposing views. (Corbin was a different generation, though, than Karl Llewllyn, legal realist.)
Nineteenth century judges were concerned about illusory promises. The underlying basis of decisions has been the distinction between good faith and bad faith agreements. The author speaks of a unified theory of civil obligations, contracts and torts.
The book is brisk and charming. The author addresses a seemingly dry subject with wit.
Great buy November 30, 2009
W. Weaver
This is a great book, was in great condition, and the order was filled promptly. Some later scholarly work discredits Gilmore's take on Raffles v. Wichelhaus, but nonetheless, provides an interesting window into the development and evolution of contract law through the 20th Century.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 8
|
