BLAW Exam 2 Hypo Practice
Which act or statement is a valid offer?: A detailed advertisement A typical advertisement A price list/quote
-A detailed advertisement Ads are generally not offers, but instead are requests for someone to make an offer. A very detailed advertisement is an exception, and could be considered an offer.
What are the types of situations that may qualify as grounds for discharge due to impossibility? Choose 3 answers. -A party to a personal contract dies or becomes incapacitated. -The price of the subject matter of the contract more than doubles. -The subject matter of the contract becomes illegal. -The specific subject matter of the contract is destroyed.
-A party to a personal contract dies or becomes incapacitated. -The subject matter of the contract becomes illegal. -The specific subject matter of the contract is destroyed.
What factors are used to judge if consideration is adequate to ensure a fair bargain? Choose 2 answers. -Promises exchanged may not be a preexisting duty. -Promises must be made with voluntary consent. -Items or promises exchanged must be of nearly equal value. -Consideration must be a promise to pay money.
-Promises exchanged may not be a preexisting duty. -Promises must be made with voluntary consent.
The weekly Kroger advertisement states that five-pound chubs of ground chuck are available for eighty-nine cents per pound. Arlene sees the advertisement; she realizes that ground chuck has not been priced this low in quite some time, so she hurries to the store to purchase some. Arlene loads seven chubs of ground chuck in her shopping cart. When she goes to the checkout to pay, however, the cashier informs Arlene that the price in the advertisement is a typo and that the correct price is $1.89 per pound. Arlene insists that the store must honor the price listed in the advertisement, because it is an offer that she has just accepted. The cashier calls the store manager for a decision. The store manager will likely explain to Arlene: -that the advertisement is a valid offer because it is in writing. -that the advertisement is a valid offer because its terms are definite. -that advertisements are not offers, but merely a request for offers. -that the advertisement is a valid offer, and the store must honor the price in the advertisement.
-that advertisements are not offers, but merely a request for offers.
When are covenants not to compete in employment contracts considered to be against public policy? Choose 2 answers. -when the business is mostly online -when the specified time of restraint is excessive -when the geographical restriction is too broad -when the business is mostly a service business
-when the specified time of restraint is excessive -when the geographical restriction is too broad
For which of the following contracts would a court be likely to grant a remedy of specific performance? (Select 2 answers) -A contract for the sale of a Picasso painting -A contract for the sale of land -A contract for the painting of a portrait -A contract for the sale of 100 plain white shirts
A contract for the sale of a Picasso painting -This is a unique item for which there is no other substantially similar substitute on the market. A contract for the sale of land
Under the terms of a valid contract, Logan agrees to deliver fifty pounds of crab claws to Dominique by May 15. Dominique needs the crab claws for a wedding party that Dominique is catering on May 16, so time is of the essence of the contract. Logan contacts Dominique on May 15 and tells Dominique that the earliest Logan can deliver the crab claws is on May 17. Dominique cancels the order and quickly makes other arrangements for the wedding party she is catering. Logan then demands payment from Dominique for the full contract price, and Dominique refuses. If Logan sues Dominique for damages under the contract: -Dominique will not have to pay because Logan breached the contract. -Dominique will have to pay Logan the difference between what Logan was charging for the crab claws and what Dominique eventually paid. -Dominique will have to pay, but Logan must deliver the crab claws. -Dominique will have to pay or be in breach of contract.
Dominique will not have to pay because Logan breached the contract. -When one party breaches a contract, the other party is discharged. Logan breached the contract by telling Dominique on the day the delivery was due that he could not deliver.
What must a party show to be awarded substantial performance in a breach of contract lawsuit? Choose 2 answer choices. -He or she acted in good faith. -There were no deviations from the contractual requirements. -The breach was not intentional. -The breach caused no monetary damages
He or she acted in good faith. -The party must act in good faith. The breach was not intentional. -Intentional failure to comply with the contract is breach, not substantial performance.
Isabel is 17 years old and wants to stop paying for the use of the local gym, but wishes to continue teaching classes. Her contract with the company includes terms regarding her employment and use of the facility. What must she do to properly disaffirm the contract? -Isabel must disaffirm both the gym membership obligations and the employment terms in the contract. -Isabel can choose to disaffirm the gym membership portion of the contract and retain the employment terms. -Isabel must wait until she turns 18 to disaffirm the contract.
Isabel must disaffirm both the gym membership obligations and the employment terms in the contract. -The minor must disaffirm the entire contract for the disaffirmance to be valid.
Midwest Life Insurance sells a life insurance policy to Thiago. Under the terms of the contract between Thiago and Midwest Life, Thiago will pay $75 per month for the policy, and, upon Thiago's death, Midwest Life will pay $100,000 to Laurelei. Four years later, Thiago dies, and Midwest refuses to pay under the terms of the policy. The party entitled to sue Midwest for its failure to honor the terms of the contract is: -Laurelei, because she is a donee beneficiary. -Laurelei, because she is a creditor beneficiary. -Thiago's executor, because the only party to the contract with Midwest is Thiago, and Thiago is deceased. -Laurelei, because she is an incidental beneficiary.
Laurelei, because she is a donee beneficiary. When a contract is made for the express purpose of giving a gift to a third party, the third party is a donee beneficiary. A donee beneficiary can sue the promisor directly to enforce the promise.
What is the difference between legal remedies and equitable remedies for breach of contract? Equitable remedies are monetary, while legal remedies are non-monetary. Legal remedies are monetary while equitable remedies are non-monetary. Equitable remedies are only available in quasi-contract, while legal remedies are available in all other types of contracts. Legal remedies must be applied by the courts, while equitable remedies can be written into the contract.
Legal remedies are monetary while equitable remedies are non-monetary.
Korbyn enters into a contract with Peyton to sell Peyton a 1956 roadster (a vehicle). The contract has a condition precedent that the roadster will pass inspection by an independent appraiser, verifying that the roadster contains all original parts and is in good working order. This contract provision means that: -Peyton is not required to perform under the contract until the appraisal is complete and the roadster passes inspection. -Peyton must pay for the roadster at the time of contracting, and Korbyn will then order the appraisal. -Peyton must have the appraisal completed within thirty days of performing the contract and provide the results to Korbyn. -if the appraisal is not satisfactory to both parties, the contract price will be adjusted accordingly.
Peyton is not required to perform under the contract until the appraisal is complete and the roadster passes inspection. -This is an example of a condition precedent, a condition that must be fulfilled before a party's promise becomes absolute. Until the condition is satisfied, there is no absolute duty to perform.
Ruby, a seventeen-year-old, purchases a car from Smitz Used Auto Sales and agrees to pay for it over a period of twenty-four months. Ruby makes the payments for four months but then decides the car payment is too much for her limited budget. Ruby tells Smitz that she wants to stop making payments and that she wants out of the contract completely. The contract between Ruby and Smitz can be canceled by: -Ruby, because she is a minor, and Ruby may keep the car. -Ruby, because she is a minor, but Ruby must return the car. -Smitz, because Ruby is a minor, but Smitz must allow Ruby to keep the car. -Smitz or Ruby, because Ruby is a minor, and Ruby may keep the car.
Ruby, because she is a minor, but Ruby must return the car.
What is the result of a contract in which both parties are wrong about a material fact of the contract? The contract must be nullified and renegotiated. The contract is void. The contract is voidable. The contract is enforceable by both parties as both parties assumed the risk in making the contract.
The contract is voidable.
What is the test for whether a contract is governed by the Statute of Frauds because of the one-year rule? The contract must be unlikely to be performable in less than one year. The contract must be objectively impossible to perform within one year.
The contract must be objectively impossible to perform within one year.
What are the legal differences between a material breach and an immaterial breach of contract? Choose 2 answer choices. -The level of the performance of the contractual obligations -Whether the court will discharge the contract -The dollar amount of damages
The level of the performance of the contractual obligations -A minor (immaterial) breach occurs when one of the parties fails to complete a minor part of the contract, while a material breach occurs when one party fails to perform his or her contractual obligations in a way that harms the non-breaching party. The breaching party did not perform to the level of substantial performance. Whether the court will discharge the contract -With any breach, the non-breaching party can sue for damages, but with a material breach, the contract is discharged.
What type of acceptance requires an affirmative action for the offeree to accept that offer?: The typical type of acceptance to an offer Browsewrap Agreements Unilateral contracts Offeree's silence in response to an offer
Unilateral contracts -With a unilateral contract, one party makes an offer for which the other party must accept by action, not words. As a result, the required action is the method of acceptance.
Restitution is an appropriate remedy when: (Select three) a contract has been rescinded. a contract has been breached. an injunction is necessary. when the parties never had a contract.
a contract has been rescinded. a contract has been breached. when the parties never had a contract.
Which of the following is an equitable remedy for breach of contract? -compensatory damages for having to hire extra help to correct nonconforming goods -payment of the cost of cover for items not delivered on time -punitive damages when a seller has repeatedly shipped unsafe goods -an order for specific performance
an order for specific performance -Specific performance is a contractual remedy in which the court orders a party to actually perform its promise as closely as possible because monetary damages are somehow inadequate to fix the harm. It is most commonly ordered in cases involving real property and rare or unique goods. This is an equitable remedy because it is used when monetary compensation cannot adequately resolve the wrongdoing.
Jayden is restoring a house for Jane when Hurricane Emma hits and washes out the foundations of the house. The cost for restoration has just increased by 400%. Under what principle may Jayden's obligations be excused? -impossibility -statute of limitations -insurable interest -commercial impracticality
commercial impracticality -A mere increase in cost is not grounds to have a contract discharged, but in highly unusual situations that are far from what the parties could have reasonably expected a contract may be discharged for commercial impracticality.
Zayn boards the Big Rock Metro to ride downtown to his job. Zayn gives his money to the driver and takes his seat. Neither the driver nor Zayn says anything. Zayn and the bus driver: -have no contract. -have an express contract. -have a formal contract. -have an implied contract.
have an implied contract. -An implied contract is a contract formed by the actions of the parties. Here, Zayn gave the bus driver money and the bus driver implicitly agreed to take Zayn to his destination. Therefore, they have an implied contract. -formal: contract in a formal process, express: oral contract.
If two parties have an on-going oral agreement that that one will ship and the other will accept 50 pounds of produce each week unless the buyer informs the seller one week before not to ship the next order, then the buyer's failure to speak up and tell the shipper not to send the produce: cannot be held against them as acceptance of an offer. qualifies as acceptance of that week's delivery offer. fails as an acceptance for lack of timeliness. does not qualify as a valid acceptance of the offer.
qualifies as acceptance of that week's delivery offer. -This is a case where silence can qualify as acceptance of an offer.
Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), which term in a written contract for the sale of goods is essential? the price per item or the total price the date of delivery quantity of items being purchased the place of delivery or assumption of possession
quantity of items being purchased
What is the primary purpose of the Statute of Frauds? requiring written evidence of agreements concerning important transactions preventing fraudulent behavior in the formation of contracts defining who may testify in a dispute over a contract ensuring that all details of a contract are well defined Assessment question
requiring written evidence of agreements concerning important transactions
Alvin's Department Store agrees over the telephone to purchase $1,000 worth of blankets from Blanket Emporium. Blanket Emporium sends an invoice for the blankets before shipping them, and Alvin's Department Store refuses to go forward with the deal, saying their deal is not a valid contract. The oral agreement between Blanket Emporium and Alvin's Department Store for the purchase of $1,000 worth of blankets: -does not violate the statute of frauds because it is not for the sale of real estate. -violates the statute of frauds, and is, therefore, unenforceable. -does not violate the statute of frauds because it can be completed within one year. -does not violate the statute of frauds, and is, therefore, enforceable.
violates the statute of frauds, and is, therefore, unenforceable. -Under the U.C.C., contracts for the sale of goods priced at $500 or more are required to be in writing. Because the contract between Alvin's Department Store and Blanket Emporium is oral, the contract violates the statute of frauds and is, therefore, unenforceable.
Quon decides to sell his antique roadster, so he places an ad on Craigslist. He lists the roadster as a 1957 Mercedes Benz 300SL Roadster, describes it as in good working condition, and states that no reasonable price will be refused. Fern responds to the ad and offers to pay $25,000 to Quon for the car, which Quon agrees to. In this scenario, who is the offeror? -Neither party is the offeror because there is no agreement to specific terms. -Fern is the offeror. -Quon is the offeror. -Quon was the original offeror, but Fern becomes the offeror when she offers $25,000.
-Fern is the offeror.
What legal limitations are imposed on parties to assignments and delegations? Choose 3 answers. -Contracts that are for a service that depends on a particular skill or talent may not be delegated. -A valid delegation of duties relieves the delegator from the obligation to perform. -A contract cannot prevent an assignment of the right to receive funds. -The assignee obtains only the rights that the assignor had under the contract.
-Contracts that are for a service that depends on a particular skill or talent may not be delegated. -A contract cannot prevent an assignment of the right to receive funds. -The assignee obtains only the rights that the assignor had under the contract.
Huseyin and Ashish are negotiating the details of a new garage that Ashish plans to build on Huseyin's property. They agree on the building specs, the delivery date, and a price of $25,000. Ashish draws up the contract and sends it to Huseyin to sign. Huseyin reviews the contract and notices the price is listed as $2,500 instead of $25,000. Elated at the unbelievably low price, Huseyin quickly signs the contract and sends it back to Ashish, who signs it as well. If Ashish later tries to rescind the contract due to the mistaken price: -Ashish will be successful, because it is a mathematical mistake that Huseyin was aware of. -Ashish will be successful, because the parties made a mutual mistake. -Ashish will not be successful, because a unilateral mistake is not a basis to rescind a contract.
-Ashish will be successful, because it is a mathematical mistake that Huseyin was aware of.
Which of these contracts would be enforceable, despite the existence of a mistake? Choose 2 answer choices: -Christopher agrees to sell his washer and dryer to Ella. Ella does not ask Christopher about the washer and dryer. Ella thinks the dryer uses gas instead of electricity, but she is incorrect. -Christopher agrees to sell his washer and dryer to Ella in "as is" condition. Ella thinks the set is in excellent condition and is willing to take a chance on buying it. Neither works after a few weeks of use. -Christopher agrees to sell his washer and dryer to Ella. He bought them at a yard sale and the sellers told him they were new and unused. The next week Christopher sells the washer and dyer to Ella. He tells Ella the previous sellers told him the washer and dryer were new and unused, and Christopher had never used them either. Ella believes they are new as well and, as a result, pays a higher price. When Ella encounters problems, a friend shows her parts that are worn and have been used. -Christopher agrees to sell his washer and dryer to Ella. Christopher overhears Ella telling her friend that she is happy she is getting such a great deal on a new unused washer and dryer, although Christopher knows he has used them for a year, but he does not correct her.
-Christopher agrees to sell his washer and dryer to Ella. Ella does not ask Christopher about the washer and dryer. Ella thinks the dryer uses gas instead of electricity, but she is incorrect. (When one party is mistaken as to a material fact, and the other party is not mistaken, the courts usually hold the contract enforceable.) -Christopher agrees to sell his washer and dryer to Ella in "as is" condition. Ella thinks the set is in excellent condition and is willing to take a chance on buying it. Neither works after a few weeks of use. (Courts will enforce, not rescind, contracts for mistakes related to conscious uncertainty, which occurs when one of the parties knows he or she is taking a risk, realizing there is some uncertainty about the subject matter of the contract.)
Which of the following is a valid offer?: -Arun tells Eric he will sell one of his houses for $250,000 by the end of the summer. -Arun distributes flyers at work stating he wants to sell his house, listing the address and the asking price. -Eric offers to buy Arun's house for $290,000. Arun says, "No, but I will sell it to you for $300,000." Eric seems to be upset, so Arun says he will sell it for $290,000. -Eric offers to buy Arun's house for $775,000 with no contingencies because Eric's lease ends in two months. Arun wants to think about it and six days later has not yet responded.
-Eric offers to buy Arun's house for $775,000 with no contingencies because Eric's lease ends in two months. Arun wants to think about it and six days later has not yet responded. The offer has definite terms, Eric did not set a time limit, and the time that has passed is not so excessive that the offer has been terminated by law.
Selma wants to buy Matilda's house. Selma has been admiring the house for a long time and has asked Matilda repeatedly to sell the house to her, but Matilda has always refused. Finally, Selma tells Matilda that if Matilda does not sell Selma the house, Selma will kill Matilda's daughter. Afraid for her daughter's life, Matilda signs the contract to sell the house to Selma. If Matilda later tries to rescind the contract: -Matilda may rescind the contract on the grounds that she signed the contract under duress. -Matilda may not rescind the contract because it has all the elements of a valid contract. -Matilda may rescind the contract on the grounds of undue influence. -Matilda may rescind the contract on the grounds of unconscionability.
-Matilda may rescind the contract on the grounds that she signed the contract under duress.
You go out drinking and playing cards with your buddies. After you have consumed a huge amount of alcohol, you agree to sell your motorcycle to your buddy. The next morning, after you sober up, your buddy tells you what you did. Do you think your buddy can legally hold you to the deal to sell him your motorcycle?: -Yes, he can, even though you were so intoxicated that you could not form the mental capacity to enter into a contract, whether or not your buddy knew you were intoxicated. -No, he can't, if you were so intoxicated that you could not form the mental capacity to enter into a contract, whether or not your buddy knew that you were intoxicated. Correct answer. -No, he can't, if you were so intoxicated that you could not form the mental capacity to enter into a contract, and your buddy knew you were intoxicated. -Yes, he can, even though you were so intoxicated that you could not form the mental capacity to enter into a contract, and your buddy knew you were intoxicated.
-No, he can't, if you were so intoxicated that you could not form the mental capacity to enter into a contract, and your buddy knew you were intoxicated.
Sarah is shopping at Sylvia's thrift store, and notices that the inside of the store needs repainting. Sarah offers to paint the store for $400. Sylvia does not respond to Sarah's offer. Later that day, Sarah returns to the store with painting supplies in hand and begins painting the store. Sylvia watches Sarah painting. When Sarah is finished, she demands payment of $400 from Sylvia. Will Sylvia have to pay Sarah for painting the store? -No, Sylvia will not have to pay Sarah for painting the store because silence can never be an acceptance of an offer. -Yes, Sylvia will have to pay Sarah for painting the store, even though she did not verbally agree to the contract. -No, Sylvia will not have to pay Sarah for painting the store because Sarah did not verbally agree to the contract. -Yes, Sylvia will have to pay Sarah for painting the store because silence is always an acceptance of an offer.
-Yes, Sylvia will have to pay Sarah for painting the store, even though she did not verbally agree to the contract.
Maryanne offers to sell her 2015 Mustang convertible to April for $15,000, and April agrees to those terms. April brings the $15,000 to Maryanne, and Maryanne promises to deliver the Mustang to April the next day after she has it detailed. At this point, Maryanne and April have: -no contract. -an executed contract. -an executory contract. -a unilateral contract.
-an executory contract. An executory contract is one which has not been fully performed by each party. Here, April has performed her duties under the contract, but Maryanne has not.
Jones Construction Company is building a series of new subdivisions in Newtown over the next two years. Jones enters into a verbal agreement with Harley Concrete Inc. to construct all the driveways and sidewalks in the subdivisions that Jones will be building. Jones and Harley agree on a price of $130 per cubic yard and that Jones will pay Harley at the end of each project. Assume this attempted contract is UNENFORCEABLE because it violates the Statute of Frauds. Harley completes the first project, which is four sidewalks and sixteen driveways, and bills Jones for the project. Jones decides that the price is too high and refuses to pay, claiming that they have no obligation to pay because the parties did not have a valid contract. If Harley sues Jones for payment the court would probably: -hold that Harley is entitled to nothing because parties are free to terminate contracts if they so choose. -apply quasi contract theory and award the fair market value of the work that Harley completed. -hold that Harley is entitled to nothing because the contract violates the Statute of Frauds. -apply quasi contract theory and award $130 per cubic feet, the contract price, to Harley. Assessment question
-apply quasi contract theory and award the fair market value of the work that Harley completed. The parties here did not have an enforceable contract; it violates the Statute of Frauds because it cannot be completed within one year and is not in writing. However, the court would probably apply a quasi contract theory. To recover on a quasi contract theory, the party seeking recovery must show that the party conferred a benefit on the other party, the party conferred the benefit with the reasonable expectation of being paid, the party did not act as a volunteer in conferring the benefit, and the party receiving the benefit would be unjustly enriched if allowed to retain the benefit without paying for it. The measure of benefit that would be awarded under quasi contract would be the fair market value of the work provided. Quasi contract- An obligation or contract imposed by law (a court), in the absence of an agreement, to prevent the unjust enrichment of one party
Marie and Molly enter into a written contract to sell Marie's home to Molly. At the time the contract is executed, Marie tells Molly that for the last six months she has been sharing the home with a family of extraterrestrial beings. Marie states that she has asked the extraterrestrials to move out, but they won't; therefore, she is selling the family home to get rid of them and is willing to sell the home to Molly for well below market price. After the sale of the home is complete, Marie's children challenge the sales contract on the grounds that Marie did not have the mental capacity necessary to enter into a contract, even though Marie has not been declared incompetent by the courts. The contract between Marie and Molly can be rescinded: -only if Marie's children have Marie committed to a psychiatric care facility -by either Marie or Molly. -under no circumstances, because Marie was not adjudicated insane before she signed the contract. -if Marie's children can prove that Marie lacked the mental capacity to comprehend the nature, purpose, and consequences of the contract.
-if Marie's children can prove that Marie lacked the mental capacity to comprehend the nature, purpose, and consequences of the contract.
Milo is the owner of a sporting goods store that has only been open for three months. The holiday season is coming up, and Milo realizes that he will need extra help. Milo asks his friend Jess to help him out at the store. Milo and Jess agree that Jess will work during the months of November and December. However, because Milo is unsure how much help he will need and how much he will be able to pay, they agree to decide each week on the hours that Jess will work for the following week, and to decide the hourly rate after Jess has worked two weeks before she receives her first paycheck. Just before November 1, Jess takes a job at another store. If Milo tries to sue Jess for breach of contract, the court will probably decide: -that the parties had no contract because the terms of the offer were not definite. -that the parties had a contract, but the damages could not be ascertained because the hourly rate and number of hours had not been determined. -that the parties had a contract, and Jess breached the contract. -that the parties had no contract because the terms were not in writing.
-that the parties had no contract because the terms of the offer were not definite.
Elvis agrees to provide guitar lessons to Angela's niece for three months for $600. Angela decides her niece really is not interested in guitar lessons, and assigns her rights under the contract to Jose, so Jose can use the lessons for his daughter. When Jose contacts Elvis to set up the first guitar lesson for his daughter: -Elvis will be obligated to provide guitar lessons to Jose's daughter because this is a valid assignment. -Elvis will be obligated to provide guitar lessons to both Jose's daughter and Angela's daughter. -Jose cannot enforce the contract against Elvis, because contracts are not assignable unless they contain a clause making them assignable. -Jose cannot enforce the contract against Elvis because the contract is for personal services.
Jose cannot enforce the contract against Elvis because the contract is for personal services. -When rights under a contract are assigned unconditionally, the rights of the assignor (Angela) are normally extinguished, and the assignee (Jose) has a right to demand performance from the other original party to the contract, the obligor (Elvis). Because personal services are unique to the person rendering them, however, rights to receive such personal services (like guitar lessons) are unique and cannot be assigned.
Manuel contracts to sell a painting that was painted by his deceased grandmother, then has a change of heart and decides to hang it in his own bedroom. The painting is valued at $100. He notifies Nadine, the person who had agreed to buy it. Can Nadine have the contract enforced? Yes, it can be enforced under the theory of quasi-contract because Nadine had relied on Manuel's promise. No, it can't be enforced because Manuel canceled the contract before it was executed. Yes, it can be enforced under the equitable remedy of specific performance. No, it can't be enforced because this is of a personal nature, and Manuel retains the rights to the painting.
Yes, it can be enforced under the equitable remedy of specific performance.
You agree to paint your neighbor's house for a certain price. You get ninety percent of the painting done and then have to leave town for your real job. Your neighbor is pretty mad because you didn't finish the job, and says she is not going to pay you a penny! What do you think will happen when you try to collect payment from your neighbor for painting her house? -You will probably receive the price you agreed on, less the amount it will take for her to have the painting finished. -You will probably receive the cost of your materials. -You will probably receive the full contract price. -You will probably receive nothing because you did not finish the job.
You will probably receive the price you agreed on, less the amount it will take for her to have the painting finished. -Even though you have not completely performed the contract, you have substantially performed. You will probably receive the price you agreed on, less the amount it will take for your neighbor to have the painting finished.
Nadia needs help running her bakery. Nadia contacts her friend Zoey, who has baking experience but lives in another state, and offers Zoey a job. Nadia orally promises Zoey that she will employ Zoey for at least two years. Zoey quits her job in the other state, moves her family, and begins to work for Nadia. After three months, Nadia terminates Zoey's employment. Zoey sues Nadia, claiming they had a contract for two years. If Nadia defends the lawsuit by claiming the contract could not be enforced because it violates the statute of frauds, the court will likely hold in favor of: -Nadia, because enforcement of the promise is necessary to avoid injustice. -Zoey, under the theory of promissory estoppel. -Zoey, because the agreement violated the statute of frauds. -Nadia, under the theory of promissory estoppel.
Zoey, under the theory of promissory estoppel. -Under the doctrine of promissory estoppel (also called detrimental reliance), a person who has reasonably and substantially relied on the promise of another can obtain some measure of recovery. Here, Nadia made a clear and definite promise, Nadia expected that Zoey would rely on the promise, Zoey reasonably relied on the promise by moving to a new city, Zoey's reliance was definite and resulted in substantial detriment and enforcement of the promise is necessary to avoid injustice.
In January, Victor contracted with Delrita to cater a Cinco de Mayo (May 5th raised to the th power) party for 500 of his closest friends. Neither of them anticipated that their entire state would be under stay-at-home orders on May 5 due to a global pandemic. Under what principle may Victor cancel his contract with Delrita? -frustration of purpose -time is of the essence -impossibility of performance -statute of limitations
frustration of purpose -Although it is still possible for Delrita to cook the Mexican feast, and it is still possible for Victor to pay for it, his purpose for the contract has been frustrated. Performance of a contract may be discharged if a party's principal purpose for entering into the contract is substantially frustrated by the occurrence of an event that the parties had no reason to expect at the time they made the contract.
Harold offers to sell Emma his farmland in Bryson County. After discussing the sale at length in front of their friends Nicole and Jackson, Harold and Emma orally agree on a price of $120,000 for the land. The next day, Emma goes to the bank and withdraws $120,000 to pay Harold for the land. When Emma presents the $120,000 to Harold, Harold tells Emma he was just joking and does not wish to sell the land. Emma tries to enforce the deal, and Harold continues to refuse by saying that the deal was not in writing, and, therefore, it is unenforceable. The contract between Harold and Emma for the sale of the land: -is not enforceable because it violates the statute of frauds. -is enforceable, because there are witnesses to the deal. -is not enforceable because of the theory of promissory estoppel. -is enforceable because it complies with the statute of frauds.
is not enforceable because it violates the statute of frauds. -Correct. To prevent fraud and other injury, the statute of frauds requires that certain contracts, including contracts for the sale of real property, must be in writing and signed by the parties bound by the contract.
Landscape Supply agrees to provide Delta Lawn Service eight pallets of sod for the price of $260 per pallet. The agreement contains the following provision: "This Agreement may not be amended or modified except by an instrument in writing signed by the party to be charged with such amendment or modification." Delta decides it now needs 160 pallets of sod, and Landscape is willing to reduce the price to $255 per pallet because of the increased amount. Delta and Landscape can accomplish this change to the contract by: (HINT: Choose the best/most correct answer from the choices below): -crossing out the incorrect language and replacing it by hand with the correct terms or rewriting the entire contract to include the changed provisions. -crossing out the incorrect language and replacing it by hand with the correct terms only. -signing an amendment, crossing out the incorrect language and replacing it by hand with the correct terms, or rewriting the entire contract to include the changed provisions. -signing an amendment or rewriting the entire contract to include the changed provisions only.
signing an amendment, crossing out the incorrect language and replacing it by hand with the correct terms, or rewriting the entire contract to include the changed provisions. -If a contract has a provision requiring that amendments be in writing, it can be modified by signing an amendment, crossing out the incorrect language and replacing it by hand with the correct terms, or rewriting the entire contract to include the changed provisions.