If he does so in a particular instance and, when confronted, protests that he mistakenly believed the umbrella was his, do we attribute his actions to his larcenous tendencies or to his mistaken belief?
If the umbrella filch would have taken the other person's umbrella regardless of whether he mistakenly believed it to be his own, then we cannot say that, but for his mistaken belief, he would not have made the faulty decision.
Doyle, (104) the umbrella filch need only prove that his mistaken belief was a (not the) "motivating factor" in his faulty decision to take the other person's umbrella.
A causal link between a mistake and the untoward consequence is necessary, but not sufficient, to entitle the mistaken party to relief.
115) If he is correct, the law would not excuse a mistaken party for a purposeful action.
Rescinding a contract or other agreement is more complicated because we must account for the ex ante intent of someone other than the mistaken party.
125) As was the case with mistaken transfers, the party seeking to rescind a contract for mistake need not prove that the other party was unjustly enriched.
Only the party seeking relief from liability for an intentional crime or tort or from a mistaken transfer need have been mistaken at the relevant time.
Reversal--legally undoing the mistaken act or decision--is Farnsworth's preferred remedy for a mistake that causes a party to enter into a consensual transaction, such as a contract or transfer of money by will, trust, or deed (pp.
When a mistaken party seeks reversal, Farnsworth contends "the result is generally all or nothing--the law either grants reversal or denies any relief whatsoever" (p.
A party may seek forgiveness because (1) he did not intend to do what he did; (2) his intent to do what he did was based on the mistaken assumption that he had the legal right to do it; or (3) his flawed perception of reality caused his intended act to result in unintended consequences.
162) In general, deciding whether a party has assumed the risk of a mistake, rather than whether she has made a mistake at all, encourages a court to ask whether placing the risk on the mistaken party is consistent with the parties' legitimate expectations and requires a court to balance competing interests for which, in cases of conscious ignorance, it otherwise need not account.