CONTRACTS

6 definitions found across Law Mind sources

See encyclopedia: Contracts -- Offer (Definition, Requirements, and Duration) →
CONTRACTSAuthored
The Law Mind • 1244 words
Definition
Contracts is the plural of contract. As a substantive legal term in its own right, it refers to the body of law governing the formation, validity, interpretation, performance, and enforcement of binding agreements between parties. In legal practice and legal education, "Contracts" designates both the doctrinal field and the aggregated subject matter of that field — encompassing offer and acceptance, consideration, capacity, mutuality, breach, and remedies. A contract, individually, is a legally enforceable agreement between two or more parties creating mutual obligations. For an agreement to qualify as a contract, it must generally satisfy a set of formation requirements: offer, acceptance, consideration, and the legal capacity of the parties. When these elements are present and no defense applies, courts will enforce the agreement or award remedies for its breach. As a field of law, Contracts spans several recognized subcategories based on the mode of formation and the character of the obligations created: 1. Simple contracts — Informal agreements, oral or written, supported by consideration. 2. Special contracts (contracts under seal) — Formal written instruments bearing a seal, historically enforceable without proof of consideration. 3. Contracts of record — Obligations acknowledged before a court and entered into the record, such as recognizances and judgments.
Common Confusion
CONTRACTS AS PLURAL vs. CONTRACTS AS A FIELD OF LAW When encountered in a legal text, "contracts" may mean simply more than one contract, or it may refer to the entire doctrinal body of law. Context governs. A constitutional clause protecting the "obligation of contracts" refers to individual agreements; a law school course titled "Contracts" refers to the legal field. Historical sources treat the two usages interchangeably without always signaling the shift.
Core Elements
Formation of an enforceable contract requires: - Offer: A definite proposal communicated by one party to another. - Acceptance: Unqualified agreement to the terms of the offer. - Consideration: Something of legal value exchanged by each party; the bargained-for inducement. - Capacity: Legal competence of the parties to enter binding obligations. - Legality: The subject matter must not be prohibited by law or contrary to public policy. Additional doctrines governing validity include mutual assent, absence of fraud or duress, and, in some categories, compliance with the Statute of Frauds requiring written memorialization.
Recognized Forms
/SUBTYPES Simple contract: An informal agreement, written or oral, requiring consideration. Specialty / Contract under seal: A formal written instrument; historically, the seal substituted for consideration. Contract of record: A court-acknowledged obligation; includes recognizances and court judgments. Express contract: Terms stated explicitly by the parties. Implied contract: Terms inferred from conduct or circumstances. Quasi-contract: A legal fiction imposing obligation without true agreement, to prevent unjust enrichment. Executory contract: Performance not yet completed by one or both parties. Executed contract: All obligations fully performed. Bilateral contract: Mutual promises exchanged. Unilateral contract: One party's promise in exchange for the other's act.
Why It Matters in Research
The Law Mind corpus reflects several centuries of contracts doctrine, and researchers face significant navigational challenges across historical sources. Constitutional dimension: The Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Art. I, § 10) prohibits states from passing laws impairing the obligation of contracts. Historical legal dictionaries frequently address "contracts" primarily in this constitutional context rather than as a freestanding common law doctrine. Black's 2nd Ed., as reflected in the source material, directs readers to Story and Kent for the constitutional meaning — a reminder that constitutional contracts doctrine and common law contracts doctrine, though overlapping, are distinct inquiries. Researchers using older sources should determine which frame is operative. Conflict of laws: Bouvier's source material flags the historical rule that contracts are governed by the law of the place of making (lex loci contractus) in matters of form, execution, and authentication. This rule has been substantially displaced in modern practice by the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws and party choice-of-law provisions, but it controls the meaning of contract terms and validity disputes appearing in historical cases. A historical decision applying a different state's law may reflect this now-obsolete default rule. Executors and personal representatives: Bouvier's also raises the rule that personal representatives are generally bound by, and may enforce, a decedent's contracts — with the recognized exception that contracts requiring personal performance by the decedent do not bind executors. This matters in estate and succession research, where contract claims against decedents' estates may turn on whether the obligation was personal in character. Options and derivatives: Bouvier's source material addresses calls, puts, straddles, and "spread eagles" in the context of contracts concerning securities. These instruments, treated as executory contracts in the historical sources, have since been substantially re-categorized under securities and financial regulation. Researchers examining historical financial disputes should understand that courts of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries often analyzed options contracts under general contracts doctrine, sometimes voiding them as wagering contracts, a framing that no longer governs. Classification of contracts: Rapalje & Lawrence's tripartite division — simple, special, and of record — was the standard taxonomic framework in the Anglo-American tradition through the nineteenth century. Modern sources largely abandon "contracts of record" as a contract category and treat judgments separately. Researchers reading historical materials should recognize this classification and not assume modern categories map cleanly onto older organizational schemes.
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical dictionaries approach "contracts" from multiple angles without producing a single unified doctrinal treatment. Rapalje & Lawrence provides the most structural account, deriving the term from the Latin contractus (con + traho, "to draw together") and presenting the tripartite classification of simple, special, and of record — the dominant organizing framework of the classical common law period. Bouvier's entries are dispersed across multiple doctrinal problems: conflict of laws rules for contract validity, the treatment of contracts by personal representatives, and specialized instruments like options. This reflects the encyclopedic structure of Bouvier's, which addressed contracts through specific problem contexts rather than in a consolidated general treatment. Researchers should not expect Bouvier's to function as a unified contracts treatise. Black's 2nd Ed., as represented in the source material, points outward to constitutional commentary — Story's Commentaries and Kent's Commentaries — for the meaning of "contracts" in the constitutional sense, a citation practice that underscores how the constitutional and common law dimensions of the subject were treated as separable inquiries. None of the historical dictionaries fully anticipates the modern relational and economic analysis of contracts, the dominance of the Uniform Commercial Code for commercial transactions, or the modern treatment of electronic and implied-in-fact agreements. Historical dictionary definitions are reliable guides to formation doctrine and classical classification but are incomplete guides to modern contracts law.
Jurisdictional Note
In the United States, contracts law is predominantly state common law, with the Restatement (Second) of Contracts serving as a widely influential (though non-binding) synthesis. Commercial contracts for the sale of goods are governed by Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, adopted in substantially similar form across nearly all states. Federal contracts law applies to government procurement and certain regulated industries. English law, the foundation of the American common law tradition, has diverged from American doctrine in areas including consideration, implied terms, and good faith obligations.
Related Terms
acceptancebilateral contractbreach of contractcapacityconsiderationcontractcontract of recordcovenantdeedexecutory contractexpress contractimplied contractimplied-in-law contractlocus contractusmutuality of obligationofferoffereeofferorparol evidence ruleprivity of contractquasi-contractrescissionsimple contractspecialtyStatute of Fraudsunilateral contractunjust enrichment
CONTRACTSmain
Bouvier's Law Dictionary • 1928
It is clear that, in general, a man's personal representatives are liable for his breach of contract on the one hand, and, on the other, are entitled to enforce contracts made with him. This is the rule; but it admits of a few exceptions; 6 Me. 470; 2 D. Chipm. 41. No action lies against executors upon a covenant to be performed by the testator in person, and which consequently the execu- tor cannot perform, and the performance of which is prevented by the death of tes- tator; 8 Wils. Ch. 99; Cro. Eliz. 558;1 Rolle 359; 24 Fed. Rep. 583; as if an author undertakes to compose a work, or a master covenants to instruct an apprentice, but is prevented by death. See Wms. Exec. 1467. But, for a breach committed by deceased in his lifetime, his executor would be answer- able; Cro. Eliz. 558; 1 M. & W. 423, per Parke, B.; 19 Pa. 234. As to what are such contracts, see 2 Perr. & D. 251; 10 Ad. & E. 45; 1 M. & W. 423; 30 Ga. 866; 86 N. C. 566. But whether the contract is of such a nature is a mere ques- tion of construction, depending upon the intention of the parties; Cro. Jac. 282;1 Bingh. 225; unless the intention be such as the law will not enforce; 19 Pa. 233, per Lowrie, J. Again, an executor, etc., cannot maintain an action on a promise made to deceased where the damage consisted entirely in the personal suffering of the deceased without any injury to his personal estate, as a breach of promise of marriage; 2 M. & S. 408; 4 Cush. 408; 55 Me. 142. Nor will an action for breach of promise of marriage survive against the executor of the promissor where no special damage is alleged; 132 Mass. 359; 106 Mass. 339. And as to the right of an executor or administrator to sue on a con- tract broken in the testator's lifetime, where no damage to the personal estate can be stated, see 2 Cr. M. & R. 588; 5 Tyrwh. 985, and the cases there cited. Divorce proceedings being a personal ac- tion, death of either of the parties before decree abates the proceedings and the court will not require the executor to become a party in order to answer the wife's demand for additional allowance for counsel fees; 60 Md. 185. The fact whether or not the estate of the deceased has suffered loss or damage would seem to be the criterion of the right of the personal representative to sue in another class of cases, that is, where there is a breach of an implied promise founded on a tort. For where the action, though in form ex contractu, is founded upon a tort to the person, it does not in general survive to the executor. Thus, with respect to injuries affecting the life and health of the deceased; all such as arise out of the unskilfulness of medical practitioners; or the imprisonment of the party occasioned by the negligence of his attorney, no action, generally speak- ing, can be sustained by the executor or administrator on a breach of the implied promise by the person employed to exhibit a proper portion of skill and attention; such cases being in substance actions for injuries to the person; 2 M. & S. 415, 416 :
CONTRACTSmain
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) • 1910
For the meaning of this phrase in the constitution of the United States, see 2 Story, Const. §§ 1374-1399; 1 Kent, Comm. 413-422; Pom. Const. Law; Black, Const. Law (3d Ed.) p. 720 et seq.
CONTRACTSmain
Rapalje & Lawrence • 1888
(280) by charter of feoffment from a lord, to make certain services and suits to his court, who was afterwards distrained for more services than were mentioned in the charter.-0. N. B. 162; Reg. Orig. 176. LATIN: contractus, from con, with, and traho, to draw. 1. Simple, special, and of record. - With reference to the modes of their formation, contracts are generally divided into three kinds: simple, or parol contracts, specialty contracts, or contracts under seal, and contracts of record.* Simple or parol contracts are of two kinds, according as they arise from agreetracts of record and quasi-contracts among true contracts, as it does, this would be a far better classification than the ordinary one, which is *Chit. Cont. 2. In Rann v. Hughes (7 T. R. 370; 3 Burr. 1672), it is said "that all contracts are by the laws of England distinguished into agreements by specialty, and agreements by that given in the text. See CIBLIGATION; parol." If English law did not include conQUASI-CONTRACT. (281) ment between the parties, or from impli-ing within the Statute of Frauds (q. v.) In cation of law. 2. A simple contract arising from agreement, is where two or more persons agree that one of them is to do or not to do some particular thing, in consideration of something done or to be done by the other. (Chit. Cont. 8.) "Contract," therefore, differs from "agreement" in the primary sense of that word, in including, in addition to the unity of intention and the juridical nature of the subject-matter constituting a simple agreement, the incidents of one of the parties being bound to a future performance or forbearance, and of the other party doing or agreeing to do something in return. On the side of the party so bound to a future performance or forbearance, the expression of his willingness or intention to do it is called a "promise" (q. v.) and the performance or forbearance done or promised by the other party, is called the "consideration for his promise." Thus, if A. agrees with B. that either case, the writing is the only admissible evidence of the contract, although extrinsic evidence is admissible for various purposes, e. g. to identify the parties and the subject-matter of the contract, or to show intent, that it was made subject to usages of trade, &c. Leake Cont. 103. 25. Implied in law. --Simple contracts arising independently of agreement, or contracts implied in law, exist in certain cases where an obligation is created by law for the purpose of setting the parties right, where one of them has suffered loss by doing something for the benefit of the other, or where one of them has wrongfully, or by accident, gained an advantage over the other. The following are the most important examples: 26. If A., being compelled by law, has paid money which B. is ultimately liable to pay, A. may recover it from B. under an implied contract to repay it; as if an executor has been compelled to pay legacy he will sell B. goods, and B. pays him $5 duty for which the legatee is ultimately in respect of them, this is a contract of liable. (Chit. Cont. 587; Leake Cont. 41.) sale; there is a unity of intention between This is called "an action for money paid the parties: A. promises to deliver the goods to B., in consideration of B.'s paying him $5. Leake Cont. 8 et seq.; Poll. Cont. 5 et seq. See CONSIDERATION; PROMISE; REQUEST. 3. Express and implied. Simple contracts created by agreement are divided, according to the manner in which the agreement appears, into express and implied. Thus, if A. says to B., "Will you sell me your horse for $50?" and B. says, "I will," this is an express contract; but if I order goods of a tradesman without promising to pay for them, my contract to do so is implied. (See EXPRESS; IMPLIED.) "Implied contracts" must not be confounded with "contracts implied in law" (infra & 5), although the terms are sometimes used interchangeably. Leake Cont. 12; Chit. Cont. 55; 2 Bl. Com. 443; Marzetti v. Williams, 1 Barn. & Ad. 415. 4. Written and verbal. Simple contracts are also divisible into contracts in writing, and verbal contracts. Contracts are put into writing, either voluntarily, or in pursuance of a rule of law, as in the case of hills of exchange and contracts fallby the plaintiff for the use of the defendant at his request." 7. Where a person does something for another without having been requested by him to do it, and the latter adopts and takes the benefit of the act, the law implies a contract by him to pay the reasonable value of the other's services. This is called "acceptance of an executed consideration." Chit. Cont. 50. 8. If A. wrongfully takes goods from B. and sells them, or has obtained money from B. by fraud, or by B.'s mistake or the like, B. may sue A. for the amount on an implied contract by A. to pay it to him. This is called "an action for money had and received by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff." (Chit. Cont. 558; Leake Cont. 47.) These forms of actions seem to have been invented partly to give remedy which would not otherwise have been available at common law, partly because the procedure in an action of assumpsit (q. v.) was often more convenient than that in an action of debt or tort. 9. Specialty contracts. -A contract under seal, or specialty contract, is created (282) Cont. 671), and that it is discharged by the death of the party on whose personality it is founded. Leake Cont. 642. See, also, as to the bankruptcy of the contractor, Id. 648. by the execution of a deed binding the riage, or a contract to paint a picture. It party or parties executing it to a future follows, from the nature of a personal conact or forbearance. (See DEED.) Such a tract, that it cannot be assigned (Chit. contract necessarily involves the element of agreement, but it derives its legal effect solely from the formality of sealing and delivery, and not from the mere fact of agreement (Leake Cont. 76); it also involves the element of a promise, (as opposed to a conveyance, appointment, &c.,) and in these two points a contract under seal resembles a simple contract, but they differ in the important respect that no consideration is required to give validity to a contract under seal as between the parties to it. (See CONSIDERATION, 2; Chit. Cont. 5; Leake Cont. 84.) As regards its effects, also, a contract under seal differs in some respects from a simple contract. Chit. Cont. 6; Leake Cont. 88. See COVENANT; DEBT; ESTOPPEL; LIMITATION OF ACTIONS; MERGER. 10. Contracts of record are not really contracts at all, but are transactions which, being entered on the records of certain courts called "courts of record," are conclusive proof of the facts thereby appearing, and could formerly be enforced by action of law as if they had been put in the shape of a contract.* They consist of judgments, recognizances, &c. See those titles; also, COGNOVIT; DEBT; LIMITATION OF ACTIONS; MERGER; WARRANTS OF AT-
contractsnoun
Wiktionary (English) • 2026
Wiktionary contributorsCC BY-SA 4.0 • via Kaikki
Extracted and formatted for display by Law Mind. Source link opens the current Wiktionary page and its contributor history; it is not a frozen copy of this extract.
plural of contract
contractsverb
Wiktionary (English) • 2026
Wiktionary contributorsCC BY-SA 4.0 • via Kaikki
Extracted and formatted for display by Law Mind. Source link opens the current Wiktionary page and its contributor history; it is not a frozen copy of this extract.
third-person singular simple present indicative of contract

Explore the full Law Mind legal research platform.

SubscribeEncyclopediaSign In