I have the following thoughts on Erroneous Jury Instruction regarding my case "Frequently in contract disputes both parties fail to perform. Ascertaining the required order of performance is therefore important in determining whether a party's failure to perform constitutes a breach or is justified by the other's failure." p. 313 Roszkowski (My textbook from my only Law course).
Jury instruction number 16 was as given as modified as follows: As stated in Instruction 1, the first element of a contract claim Antonio Vernon must prove is that he substantially performed all obligations required of him under the contract. To recover his claim, Plaintiff Antonio Vernon must prove that he substantially complied with the terms and conditions set forth in the University Student Manual, the GSB Student Handbook, the Ph. D. student Guidebook, and the GSB Disciplinary Procedures.
There was no instruction to the jury covering the possibility that they should consider whether counterparty failure was justification if they felt I had breached the contract. The instructions merely state that if we both breached they should be found not guilty without regard to whether counterparty breach justified my breach. There are numerous ways that any of the possible University breaches justified all of my breaches.
Donations to his legal fund by credit card and electronic payment
can be made via free paypal accounts (from www.paypal.com) to
firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com.