12
2 246 Cal. App. 2d 123, 54 Cal. Rptr. 533 (1966)
3 Id. at 133, 541.
4 Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 177 (1981).
Undue Influence
Ariel may claim Ursula used unfair persuasion which amounted to undue influence. In Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School District, the court listed seven factors for considering whether a person subjected another to undue influence.2
Ariel might claim:
“The parties “discuss(ed) the transaction at an unusual or inappropriate time.”3 Flotsam and Jetsam came to her immediately after the destruction of her treasure trove. Ariel could attempt to show she was emotionally distraught at the time she was approached by Ursula’s agents.
The parties “consummate(ed) the transaction in an unusual place.” Ursula’s lair appears to be the skeleton of a dinosaur and her décor includes a variety of green, fin-high creatures which do not speak but do grab at visitors’ arms and wrists. Though Ariel keeps company with a variety of sentient marine creatures, footage suggests she had never encountered the green people before, nor had she ever visited Ursula’s lair on a prior occasion. However, Ursula may counter-claim that her dwelling was a natural place to conduct business, as her spells required a variety of components which might be difficult to transport.
Ursula made “insistent demand(s) that the business be finished at once.” Ursula made statements such as, “I haven’t got all day,” and “go ahead and sign the scroll!” in song. Ariel might argue that Ursula’s performance, fast-spoken and physically-aggressive, did not allow Ariel much time to contemplate the terms of their agreement.
Ursula “use(d) multiple persuaders.” Flotsam and Jetsam convinced Ariel to come visit Ursula, even though Ariel expressed distaste and wariness towards Ursula’s business practices. Ursula may counter by claiming Ariel had advisors present (Sebastian and Flounder); however, when Sebastian attempted to warn Ariel, the eels wrapped around him and Flounder so that Ariel was unable to hear his warning. So, although Ariel’s advisors were physically present, they were unable to perform in the capacity expected in the Odorizzi test.
Ariel need not prove every element, but if she can demonstrate several, the “persuasion may be characterized as excessive.” In the event that Ariel can prove undue influence, she would be able to void the contract, unless Ursula can prove that she “in good faith and without reason to know of the undue influence either (gave) value or relie(d) materially on the transaction.”4 Ursula may claim that she held no position o authority over Ariel, as Ariel is a princess and presumably has plenty of her own authority. If Ursula can show that she, in good faith, believed Ariel possessed equal power and that Ursula relied on the transaction, this defense may not work for Ariel.
5 Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 205 (1981).
6 Id. at § 14.
7 See id. at § 280
8 Id. at § 766 (1979).