Read on Twitter
[*law professor hat*] Force Majeure ("Act of God") clauses are common in contracts. They're boilerplate, everywhere. HOWEVER: In a time of LITERAL PLAGUE and CONSTANT CIVIL UNREST, I would argue that this one needs to be revisited. https://twitter.com/jacobethank/status/1286823786503905281
I want to talk about this @UNC Force Majeure housing clause again, because someone's been annoying me about it, and because it's really important to understand why it's wrong.
A force majeure ("Act of God") clause is meant to handle /unpredictable/ events that might rain down from heaven so to speak. A hurricane, for example, for those in the south. (pinging original poster @jacobethank by the way—I want to be sure you know I agree with you.)
It's NOT meant to handle an afternoon thunderstorm, something we get nearly every day in summer. That's not an "act of god," in legal terms, that's just a Tuesday.
"Plague" or "epidemic" are typical terms in act of god clauses. ("Boilerplate.") What I said in my original tweet was that in a time of plague—Now—plague becomes that afternoon thunderstorm rather than a hurricane.
BUT WHAT'S WORSE: UNC added language particular to this pandemic. That's not okay. That's like saying, "We know it's raining right now. We're not liable for rain." That's not force majeure. That's the opposite of force majeure.
If you're a UNC student and you got this in your inbox, you should be angry. It's not okay.
@andreactually you probably saw this. also @aznchew
@andreactually you probably saw this. also @aznchew
