1. Paula is a professional singer. On December 31, Paula and Downstate Recording Company signed an employment contract whereby Paula promised to work for Downstate as a recording artist for the next three calendar years. Downstate promised to pay Paula $160,000 per year. In addition, the contract provided that if Paula breached the contract Paula could not take employment as a singer for any other recording company operating in North America for the remainder of the term of the contract plus two years; and if Downstate breached the contract, Downstate would pay Paula her salary for the remainder of the term of the contract but Paula would be prohibited from employment as a singer for any other recording company operating in North America for the remainder of the term of the contract. The contract provided, in part, that “insubordination” would constitute a breach by Paula and that Downstate would take no actions to “degrade the singer’s image.” During the two years following the contract, Paula sometimes sang backup for other recording artists when asked by Downstate. The other employee singers also sang backup for her when asked. These assignments included concert performances, although in small venues with simple costumes. On December 31 of the second year, Downstate asked Paula to sing backup for another recording artist on an upcoming large concert tour. The role involved Paula wearing what she described as “barely lingerie” during concerts which she believed to be “degrading to my image.” Paula refused to do the job and told Downstate that she was hired as a principal singer and she had no “intention of accommodating Downstate any longer.” Downstate wrote in an email to Paula that the “costumes” were “similar to those worn by other artists in the field”; “the other two backup singers have not objected to the costumes”; “whether she liked it or not singing was partially a performance art and wearing revealing clothing is part of the job”; and ending with “it’s not like we’re asking you to strip on stage.” Paula was furious at Downstate for these comments. When confronted again by Paula, Downstate stated to her “you either do the backup job or you are fired for insubordination.” Paula stormed off stating “I’m not your b___!” Downstate fired her for insubordination the next day. Downstate did not pay her for the remaining year of her contract. Paula was unemployed for the entire next year. However, she paid an independent recording company to record her new album for a set fee. After releasing the album online to her social media following, Paula was contacted on December 31 of the third year after the Downstate contract to sign an employment contract as a principal singer for a major record label, including a three album commitment and at least two concert tours to promote her works. She was offered a $900,000 signing bonus and 18% of net revenues from the albums and concerts. She signed on January 1. Downstate sued Paula to enforce the two year employment prohibition in their contract and obtain an injunction against her working for the major record label for two years. Downstate did offer to re-hire her and match the compensation deal with the major record label. Paula refused the offer from Downstate and counter-sued for breach of contract and payment of $160,000 in salary for the third year of her original contract. Paula admitted in her deposition that the concerts with the major record label would include “sexy costumes, but that they were not as degrading as those demanded by Downstate” and “even if [the costumes] were outside my comfort zone, as a principal singer fans do not look at you the same way.” She also admitted that “a source, but not the only source” of her anger at Downstate was “because backup singers do not receive as much public recognition as principal singers and Downstate was not doing enough to promote me as a principal singer.” In the Downstate v. Paula case, including the countersuit by Paula, who will win and more importantly why? Explain fully the reasoning the court will use to determine the legal and/or equitable judgment. Calculate the damages, if any, awarded by the court. 2. After several weeks of negotiations, Home Owner, who wanted to renovate the kitchen in his home, and Karl Kitchen, came to an agreement about every aspect of Owner’s kitchen renovation. Owner was particularly enthusiastic about the renovation because Kitchen hired by contract “Cam from Blacktail Studio,” a famous YouTube epoxy wood slab artist, to create a custom wood slab kitchen island top. This island top, by itself, constituted $15,000 of the cost of the renovation, not including the cost to install it. Kitchen expected to complete the work within four weeks after he began renovations. But Kitchen would not begin until the island top was ordered, as it was expected to take five weeks to fabricate. The agreed price for the renovations was $60,000 -- $30,000 to be paid the first week with the slab order; $15,000 halfway through; and $15,000 when the job was done. In March, Owner and Kitchen met to sign a contract that contained their agreement including specifications, price, and payments. Before they signed, Owner said to Kitchen, "This writing doesn't say that I don't have to make the final payment until all your work is completed according to the specifications.” Kitchen replied, "There's no need for that, it's understood. I always complete my work." Owner said, "Of course I trust you, but as an attorney I know to get it in writing.” Kitchen replied "Understood." and they both signed the contract and a separate handwritten paper that said “As an express condition to any payment, each and every aspect of the kitchen must be completed exactly as stated in the contract. Any failure in workmanship shall void any remaining payments.” The work went as planned and Owner paid Kitchen the first two installments for a total of $45,000. In the middle of the last week of work Kitchen asked Owner for $5,000 of the final payment to cover the costs of labor that would be needed to install the island top. Owner replied, "Look who's demanding money. You're not going to get any of that last payment. I saw on the Blacktail YouTube channel that the island top was made by Cam's assistant, not the master himself! Cam never worked on it after selecting the wood and composing the layout of the slab. He only supervised the worker for the rest and then signed the underside." Kitchen tried to explain: "The top looks the same. The YouTube video has over 10.5 million views. It is beautiful. The top cost me the same no matter who at Blacktail Studio did it. The kitchen is worth the same. I thought you wanted a Blacktail Studio island top and that's what you got." Owner cut him off and said, "You breached the contract and you're fired." Kitchen made no effort to complete the kitchen. But did leave the uninstalled top at the home. It would have cost Kitchen $5,000 to complete the kitchen. Owner refused to pay Kitchen and hired Magnificent Manors to complete the job and install the top for $7,000. Owner sues Blacktail Studio for breach of the contract with Kitchen to have Cam manufacture the top seeking damages of $13,000 for the “forged island top work of art.” Kitchen sues Owner for payment of the final $15,000 under the contract. In the Owner v. Blacktail Studio case who will win and more importantly why? In the Kitchen v. Owner case who will win and more importantly why? Explain fully the reasoning the court will use to determine the legal and/or equitable judgment. Calculate the damages, if any, awarded by the court