5 4 assignment case study drafting a contract real estate agreement

Hey what’s up? Here is the next case study:

Sally’s Situation

ally FaceTimes you; it’s 3 A.M. and you were up slugging away at your course work and tying up some loose ends for the project, so you didn’t mind the break. She instantly jumps in saying, “Look! I found a whole bunch of stuff that we need to review. After I received the Market study for that property in Boca (DOCX), I thought we should start reviewing the terms. The stuff I found will be great as an exercise to prepare us for negotiating the terms for the Boca property. I am sending it all over for you to review. When you finish looking it over, I think it would be fun to practice filling them out. Some of the stuff will help us understand the meaning of the various clauses and conditions contained in the agreements that we will encounter once we start negotiating to buy a property. Take a look at them; let me know what you think. I will send over instructions for an exercise we can do a little later.”

Your Assignment

Sally wants you to take a look at the Contract of Sale of Commercial Property (DOCX). and the Annotated Sale of Commercial Property Contract (DOCX). Sally also asks that you redraft clauses, change terms, add clauses, and make paragraphs mutual rather than one-sided. The article, The Purchase and Sale Agreement (Clark Wilson), (Links to an external site.) will help you in making the proper revisions. These Tips for Drafting Contracts (PDF) should be helpful too. Lastly, the assigned readings in the text are also a good resource for this assignment.

Rubric:

MGMT 390 – 5.4 Case Study – Drafting a Contract/Real Estate Agreement

MGMT 390 – 5.4 Case Study – Drafting a Contract/Real Estate Agreement

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentification and Analysis of the Main Issues/ProblemThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome: Identification and Analysis of the Main Issues/Problem

25.0 pts

A Superior

25.0 pts Identifies and understands all of the main issues in the question. An insightful, and thorough analysis of all the issues.

23.0 pts

B Above Average

Identifies and understands most of the main issues in the question. A thorough analysis of most of the issues.

21.0 pts

C Average

Identifies and understands some of the issues in the question. A superficial analysis of some of the issues in the case.

19.0 pts

D Below Average

Identifies and understands a few of the issues in question. Incomplete analysis of the issues.

17.0 pts

F Failure

Identifies and understands very little of the issues in the question. No analysis of the issues.

25.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnswers to Research QuestionsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome: Answers to Research Questions.

20.0 pts

A Superior

Answers to research questions are clear throughout. Connection with class and study material goes well beyond the obvious connections among ideas; demonstrates insight and original thinking.

18.0 pts

B Above Average

Answers to research questions present some irrelevant information on topic etc., but very little; treatment goes beyond obvious connections with class and study material.

16.0 pts

C Average

Answers to research questions are vague in places; some irrelevant or distracting information.

14.0 pts

D Below Average

Answers to research questions are unclear and/or confusing. Treatment is very superficial; paper may be well written but says nothing.

12.0 pts

F Failure

Does not address the research questions. Treatment is very superficial and says very little.

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization and CoherenceThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome: Organization and Coherence

20.0 pts

A Superior

Uses a logical structure appropriate to paper’s subject, purpose, audience, thesis, and disciplinary field. Sophisticated transitional sentences often develop one idea from the previous one or identify their logical relations. It guides the reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.

18.0 pts

B Above Average

Shows a logical progression of ideas and uses fairly sophisticated transitional devices; e.g., may move from a least to a more important idea. Some logical links may be faulty, but each paragraph clearly relates to paper’s central idea.

16.0 pts

C Average

May list ideas or arrange them randomly rather than using any evident logical structure. May use transitions, but they are likely to be sequential (first, second, third) rather than logic-based. While each paragraph may relate to central idea, logic is not always clear. Paragraphs have topic sentences but may be overly general, and arrangement of sentences within paragraphs may lack coherence.

14.0 pts

D Below Average

May have random organization, lacking internal paragraph coherence and using few or inappropriate transitions. Paragraphs may lack topic sentences or main ideas, or may be too general or too specific to be effective. Paragraphs may not all relate to paper’s thesis.

12.0 pts

F Failure

Absent of any kind of organization. Lacks paragraph topic sentence and transitions between paragraphs. Paragraphs do not relate to the paper’s thesis.

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLinks to Course Readings and Additional ResearchThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome: Links to Course Readings and Additional Research

20.0 pts

A Superior

Excellent research into the issues with clearly documented links to class (and/or outside) readings. Much more than the minimum required; effort to explore topic exceeds expectations; use of primary and secondary sources; all information meets quality criteria. Sources interspersed with writer’s own analysis or synthesis; quotes are less than 10% of paper; good use of summary and paraphrase; all sources are documented; 1- 3 minor errors (such as incorrect punctuation).

18.0 pts

B Above Average

Good research and documented links to the material read. Slightly more than the minimum required; effort to ensure breadth and depth; possibly no primary sources; all information meets quality criteria. Sources interspersed with writer’s own work; quotes are less than 20% of paper; good use of summary and paraphrase; all sources are documented; 4- 6 minor errors (such as incorrect punctuation).

16.0 pts

C Average

Limited research and documented links to any readings. At least the minimum required; reasonable breadth and depth of exploration; 1-2 sources lack quality criteria (i.e., Wikipedia). 1-2 instances of stringing source references together with little of the writer’s own work; quotes are 25% or more of paper; 1-2 citations missing or with major errors (ex: authors missing or incorrect).

14.0 pts

D Below Average

Incomplete research and links to any readings. Less than the minimum required; or providing only surface coverage; most sources lack quality criteria. More than 2 instances of stringing source references; quotes are 40% or more of paper; OR paper includes few references to sources; 3-4 citations missing or with major errors.

12.0 pts

F Failure

Provided no references or support of analysis. Very few sources; no attempt to explore various points of view; all sources lack quality criteria total. No references to sources; OR there is evidence of plagiarism; 5 or more citations missing or with major errors.

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStyle, Mechanics, and FormatThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome: Style, Mechanics, and Format

15.0 pts

A Superior

Chooses words for their precise meaning and uses an appropriate level of specificity. Sentence style fits audience and purpose. Sentences clearly structured and carefully focused. Almost entirely free of spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors. Accurately use required formatting style and proper referencing.

12.0 pts

B Above Average

Generally uses words accurately and effectively, but may be too general. Sentences generally clear, structured, and focused, though some may be awkward or ineffective. May contain a few errors, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding. Accurately use required formatting style and proper referencing.

10.0 pts

C Average

Uses relatively vague and general words, may use some inappropriate language. Sentence’s structure generally correct, but sentences may be wordy, unfocused, repetitive, or confusing. Usually contains several mechanical errors, which may temporarily confuse the reader but not impede the overall understanding. Accurately use required formatting style and proper referencing with few exceptions.

8.0 pts

D Below Average

Tends to being vague and abstract, or very personal and specific. Usually contains several awkward or ungrammatical sentences; sentence structure is simple or monotonous. Usually contains either many mechanical errors or a few important errors that block the reader’s understanding and ability to see connections between thoughts. Accurately use required formatting style and proper referencing with several exceptions.

6.0 pts

F Failure

Misuse of words throughout. Awkward sentences throughout. Difficult to attach a thought process. Poorly punctuated, misspelled words, grammatically abusive. Fail to use required formatting style and proper referencing.

15.0 pts

Total Points: 100.0

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.