buz law 3

On thursday, graham made Bell an offer in which she stated that "if you choose to accept, you must communicate that decision solely by means of a telephone call to me at my office prior to 2:00 p.m. tomorrow." Bell, never one to rely on the telephone as a means of communicating important information, had a telegram of acceptance (note that a telegram is not the same thing as a phone call) dispatched the Graham before 2:00 p.m. on Friday. The telegram was delivered to Graham's office at 2:15 p.m. on Friday. Do Graham and Bell have a contract? a. No, because Bell's supposed acceptance was in an improper form. b. Yes because Bell dispatched the telegram prior to 2:00 p.m. c. No, because Bell's use of a telegram amounted to a revocation of Graham's offer. d. Yes, because Bell's communication of acceptance substantially complied with the terms of the offer.

A) No, because Bell's supposed acceptance was in an improper form.

In class to tie together some of the contracts material we studied we watched a 60 minutes highlighting a contract dispute and a marketing company

False

In class we watched a 60 minute video highlighting the use of confidential protective orders and confidential settlement agreements in the criminal and civil cases charging Kobe Bryant

False

The article was about several prominent donors who reneged on a promise to give sums of money to the cal poly college of agricultural and college of business

False

Bait and switch advertising refers to the practice of advertising goods at a very low price or on very favorable terms, with no intention to sell them as advertised.

True

27. Usury laws are concerned with: a. taxes paid b. interest charged c. uses of the labor force d. contract purposes

b. interest charged

What kind of contract is formed when each party makes a promise in return for the other's promise? a. a unilateral contract b. a quassi contract c. a bilateral contract d. a contract by acceptance e. an implied contract

c. a bilateral contract

Which of the following can be considered legally valid consideration under contract law? a. A promise to perform a service at/on a specific date in the future. b. Payment of cash c. Actual performance of a service d. B and C only e. A, B, and C

e. A, B, and C

In order to satisfy the Statute of Frauds sufficiency of a writing requirement, generally a writing requirement must: a. Be a formal, written document b. Be any written memorandum containing the essential terms of the parties' agreement c. Be signed by the party against whom enforcement of the contract is sought d. A and C e. B and C

e. B and C

30. A minor unable to live at home for safety reasons (his parents fought so violently that the safety of other family members was put in jeopardy), contracts to rent an apartment for three months at $600 per month. After living there for three months, he disaffirms/cancels the contract. The reasonable value of that apartment was only $500 per month. Assuming no rent has been paid, the minor must pay: a. Nothing; the contract has been disaffirmed b. $1,800; the contract rate for three months c. $1,500; the reasonable value for three months d. $7,200; the contract rate for one year e. $6,000; the reasonable rate for one year

?

Which of the following contracts is not required to be in writing under the Statute of Frauds? a. A contract to be performed in less than one year b. A contract made in consideration of a promise to marry c. A contract involving the sales of land d. A contract for the sale of goods valued at $500 or more e. A contract to pay someone else's debt if they fail to

a. A contract to be performed in less than one year

On monday Cindy says to Ruth, " I will sell you my car for $10,000. You have until Friday to decide." As of wednesday, RUth has paid nothing to Cindy and has not indicated if she is interested in buying the car. At this point, which is true? a. Cindy can revoke the offer on Wednesday. b. Ruth must reject Cindy's offer by Friday, or else she has bought the car. c. Cindy cannot revoke the offer on Wednesday. d. Ruth could send $250 to Cindy on Friday which would automatically make the offer irrevocable for one month.

a. Cindy can revoke the offer on Wednesday.

Fred's beautiful photograph of the Washington Monument is hanging in a gallery. Jed is looking at it and Fred tells Jed he can have it for $1,000. Jed says, "No way man! I won't pay for that!" The next day, Jed reconsiders and goes to the gallery and tells Fred he'll take it for $1,000. Which is true at this point? a. Fred can tell Jed that the price is now 1,200 b. Jed can't force Fred to take the $1,000 b/c of the prior days revocation of the offer by Fred. c. if they can't agree, a court would set the price at $1,100 d. Jed's acceptance of the $1,000 offer is effective only if Fred has not yet revoked his offer.

a. Fred can tell Jed that the price is now 1,200

The following statements pertain in some sense to the consideration element of a contract. Which statements is/are legally accurate? a. If Dorkman promises Techno nerd that "I'll pay you $75 if you install the latest version of the nerd perfect word processing program on my computer" and if Techno nerd responds by saying that "I'll get the dingdang job done for you as soon as i feel like it" there is not consideration to support Dorkmans promise b. The Uniform Commercial Code established that a modification of contract for the sales of goods is not enforceable unless the modification is supported by new consideration that is separate from the consideration which supported the original version of the contract c. Although consideration can consist of taking a particular action, it cannot consist of not doing something you are legally allowed to do d. Each of the above is legally accurate

a. If Dorkman promises Techno nerd that "I'll pay you $75 if you install the latest version of the nerd perfect word processing program on my computer" and if Techno nerd responds by saying that "I'll get the dingdang job done for you as soon as i feel like it" there is not consideration to support Dorkmans promise

Ernie prestwick is a wholesale dealer of "Elvis on Black Velvet" (EOBV) portraits (a good for the purpose of the UCC). Wanda King owns a shop at which she sells memorabilia associated with the late Elvis Presley. All of the events about to be described occurred in the year 2009. Prestwick wrote, signed and mailed to King on July 1 letter in which he offered to sell King five (g) EOBV portraits for the special price of $799 per portrait. (He normally would charge $999 a piece.) Prestwick's letter stated that this incredible offer will remain open until July 15." King received the letter on July 2. On July 7, not having heard anything from King, Prestwick telephoned King and informed her that "the EOBV deal I proposed in my July 1 letter is more dead than Elvis himself is rumored to be, because I hereby revoke my offer. Thank you very much." On July 11, King arrived at Prestwick's office and presented him with a written acceptance of his July 1 offer and a check for the full purchase price. Prestwick, however, denied that the parties had a contract and refused King's check. When Pretwick continued to refuse to sell EOBV portraits on the terms in his July 1 offer, King sued him for breach of contract. Which party should win the lawsuit and why? a. King, because Prestwick made a firm offer which she accepted within the offer's duration. b. Prestwick, because he received no consideration in return for the specific promise to hold his offer open. c. King, because of the operation of the assumption of risk doctrine. d. Prestwick, because he revoked his offer prior to any attempt by King to accept it.

a. King, because Prestwick made a firm offer which she accepted within the offer's duration.

On august 1,2007 Ariel Oldbag made a written offer to sell Marginal State University her palatial estate, Oldbag manor, for $500,000. On that same date, Oldbag also extended MSU a written option to buy the property at the offered price until july 1, 20088. MSU paid oldbag 4,000( the amount specified by her) for the option. Which of the following is an accurate statement? a. MSU has no legal obligation to purchase the property from Oldbag b. oldbag may revoke her offer to sell the property at any time before MSU accepts so long as she refunds the 4,000 c. if MUS decides not to purchase Oldbag manor Oldbag will have a valid breach of contract claim against MSU d. if oldbag notifies MSU in writing on December 1, that she does not want to sell, she will be acting in a manner consistent with the mutuality of obligation reasonably contemplated by the option

a. MSU has no legal obligation to purchase the property from Oldbag

Two friends, Ann (33 years old) and Mary (35 years old) are having margaritas at happy hour. There had been no discussion of who would pay for the drinks. After the third round of drinks, Ann said, "I will pay for everything tonight including your drinks." Thirty seconds later Ann says, "I've changed my mind. I just remembered that they might be having layoffs at my job tomorrow." Mary wants to force Ann to perform on her promise and threatens to sue. IN this circumstances a court would: a. Not require Ann to follow through on the promise because it was a gratuitous promise (gift) b. Require Ann to follow through on the promise under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. c. Require Ann to follow through on the promise if Mary had previously paid a comparable amount for food or drinks consumed by Ann. d. Require Ann to follow through on the promise if it would be a hardship for Mary to pay for her own drinks. e. Not require Ann to follow through on the promise because it would encourage Mary to drink.

a. Not require Ann to follow through on the promise because it was a gratuitous promise (gift)

Jones is driving his tractor alongside the road when a semi-truck strikes it. Jones is seriously injured but remains alert and conscious. The truck driver continues on. Shortly thereafter, Sybil, a medical doctor, happens along, sees the situation, and renders medical attention that saves Jones' life (and which Jones gratefully accepts). Jones is taken to the hospital. Jones pulls through, but several days later he receives a bill for services from Sybil. Jones refused to pay and Sybil sues him, The most likely result will be: a. Sybil wins; this is a case of quasi-contract, Jones has been enriched, and Sybil can recover a reasonable charge for his services. b. Jones wins; there was no contract between Sybil and him, so he owes nothing. She was just a good neighbor. c. Sybil wins; by accepting her services Jones successfully invoked the Statute of Frauds. d. Jones wins; before the doctrine of quasi-contract can apply, the recipient of the benefit must have been giving the right to sign a written document that verifies that he/she agreed to accept the provided service.

a. Sybil wins; this is a case of quasi-contract, Jones has been enriched, and Sybil can recover a reasonable charge for his services.

20. Jacques Strappe owns a new sporting goods store. To announce the grand opening of his own business, Strappe placed an advertisement in the local newspaper. The ad quoted prices on various items, including a Timewaster brand exercise bicycle. The grand opening was much more successful than Strappe had imagined it would be. He was unable to satisfy all consumer demand for certain items. After strappe had sold all of the Timewaster exercise bicycles he had in stock, customer Earl Portly demanded that he sold a Timewaster exercise bicycle at the advertised price. When Strappe did not comply, Portly sued him (in small claims court) for breach of contract. How should the court rule? a. That no contract was formed because Strappe did not accept Portly's offer. b. That Strappe's advertisement was an offer, but only if Portly actually read the advertisement before coming to the store. c. That Strappe is liable for breach of a contract formed when Portly demanded an exercise bicycle at the advertised price. d. That Strappe's having run out of Timewaster exercise bicycles amounted to a revocation of his offer.

a. That no contract was formed because Strappe did not accept Portly's offer.

Thelma Jean sent Johnny Bob a letter stating that "I have me a good-running Ford half-ton pickup, which I will sell you for $1,500 in cold cash. If I ain't heard from you before Sunday, I'll assume that you want my pickup and that you'll pay me bright and early Monday." Johnny Bob received the letter but did not answer it. He refuses to pay Thelma Jean anything and would not accept delivery of the truck when she attempted to deliver in on Monday. Which of the following is an accurate statement? a. Thelma Jean and Johnny Bob do not have a contract b. On these facts, promissory estoppel would enable Thelma Jean to win a lawsuit against Johnny Bob c. Thelma Jean's letter was not on offer d. Silence never constitutes an acceptance

a. Thelma Jean and Johnny Bob do not have a contract

37. Lisa has been a dentist in SF for several years. She is now ready to retire and she sells her practice to Angie. As part of the sales agreement, Lisa agrees not to practice dentistry within 200 miles of SF for a period of 15 years. After 4 years, Lisa is bored so she opens up a dental practice in her home in Oakland. This practice is very small and Lisa wants to keep it that way. Angie sues on the non-compete agreement. What is the most likely result? a. This agreement is fully enforceable b. This agreement is not enforceable since agreement in restraint of trade are never enforeable c. This agreement is not enforceable because it is unreasonable as to area d. This agreement is not enforceable because it is unreasonable to time e. C and D

a. This agreement is fully enforceable

You are 22 years old. On your first spring break trip, you go in a bar after reading a large sign outside saying. "Beers $1 each all night long. If you can drink 30, they're all free and we'll pay for a taxi." You pay for your beers as you drink, but manage to drink 30. The bar agrees that you drank 30 beers, but refuses to refund your money or pay for the taxi. You sue the bar. Which is most likely true? a. This contract is voidable by the bar if you get so intoxicated while drinking the 30 beers that you don't comprehend the nature of what you are doing. b. The sign is an offer for a bilateral contract since both you and the bar must do something c. A court would refuse to enforce this contract on the basis of illegality d. There is no consideration on your part if you don't pay for the beer

a. This contract is voidable by the bar if you get so intoxicated while drinking the 30 beers that you don't comprehend the nature of what you are doing.

State college mailed a letter to Parkins, a former CIA director, offering Parkins the chance to deliver the 2009 Summer Commencement address at the college for $5,000. The topic of the address was to be "The Cuban Threat to American Security." In March 2009, Parkins is arrested by the FBI and charged with spying for Cuba. College's President immediately telephoned Parkins and revokes its offer. Parkin says, "Just a few minutes ago I sent you a properly postmarked and addressed letter accepting your offer. I need money for legal fees." Under these circumstances, which of the following statements is correct? a. Under traditional contract principles, Parkins has effectively accepted the offer. b. Under traditional contract principles, Parkins has not effectively accepted the offer. c. Under the UCC, Parkins has effectively accepted the offer. d. State College cannot revoke its offer due to Parkin's arrest.

a. Under traditional contract principles, Parkins has effectively accepted the offer.

Frank is a loyal employee who has spent much time going above and beyond the call of duty promoting his employer's company on weekends. Frank's boss says to him, "Because of all the good work you have done in the past, you'll get a $1,000 bonus next month. "Because of this statement: a. the company is not obligated to pay him the bonus because the consideration is past consideration. b. the company is not obligated to pay him the bonus because of the illusory promise rule. c. the company is obligated to pay him the bonus because Frank has performed the extra work d. the company is obligated to pay him he bonus because there is an implied contract

a. the company is not obligated to pay him the bonus because the consideration is past consideration.

You take a computer disk to a computer rental shop to be duplicated. Part of the written agreement you sign says, "if we destroy your disk as a result of our own ordinary negligence, we will replace the disk but will not be responsible for the value of any lost data on the disk." Under these facts this boilerplate provision is probably: a. An impermissible exculpatory clause b. A permissible and enforceable contract provision c. An unenforceable penalty provision d. Illegal and void as being against public duplicacy

b. A permissible and enforceable contract provision

24. Jean had just received a promotion and substantial raise. Jean felt her raise would make her have much more spending money, thus she planned to buy a new sports car. Jean felt she did not need to worry about receiving the best price for her old car which she thought was worth about $3,000. She sold the car for $1,500. In fact, the car was worth $5,000 and Jean had not taken into account the additional taxes on her extra income. Jean also decided that a sports car would not be very practical. Jean wanted to return the $1,500 to the purchaser and get her car back. Assuming that Jean will return the $1,500 to the buyer, Jean can: a. Get her car back if the buyer knew that Jean should not have planned to get a sports car. b. Get her car back if Jean can prove that the buyer knew the car was worth several times what he paid for it. c. Not get her car back because the court under these facts would not inquire into the difference in the value of the consideration exchanged in this case. d. Get the car back based solely in the disparity in the price and value. e. Not get the car back if the buyer had relied on getting a bargain price, but if the buyer could not prove that, Jean could get the car back.

b. Get her car back if Jean can prove that the buyer knew the car was worth several times what he paid for it.

Sally owns a very expensive fur coat which Mary would like to buy. During the course of their conversation, Mary asks how much Salty would take for the coat. Sally replies, "I am not sure I want to sell the coat, but I think it is worth about $3,000." Mary says, "That is a little more than I wanted to spend." One day later, Mary calls Sally on the telephone and says, "I'll bring over the $3,000 today." Sally refuses to sell the coat, and Mary sues. What will the result be? a. Mary wins; a valid contract was formed b. Sally wins; there was never an offer for Mary to accept c. Sally wins; when Mary said $3,000 was too much to pay, Mary rejected the offer. d. Sally wins; Mary did not accept the offer in a reasonable manner. e. Sally wins; Sally's offer expired due to the passing of a reasonable amount of time.

b. Sally wins; there was never an offer for Mary to accept

Juan owns a house in a poor area in a large city. A salesman visits home, selling aluminum siding. Juan buys and signs a contract, which calls for a price of $25k to be paif in monthly installments of $500 for 20 years. Juan only earns $700 per month. In addition, Juan's home is one worth about $35k. The aluminum siding put on is worth no more than $1,500. Juan speaks and reads very little English and Juan thought he was signing a receipt for a free gift. Which of the following best describes this contract? a. The contract is fully enforceable as written b. The contract is unenforceable because it is unconscionable c. The contract is unenforceable because it is illusory d. The contract is unenforceable because it is exculpatory e. None of the above

b. The contract is unenforceable because it is unconscionable

Silence will operate as an acceptance in the following cirumstances EXCEPT: a. The offeree indicates that silence will operate as acceptance. b. The offeror indicates silence will operate as acceptance. c. Prior dealings between the parties indicated that silence is an acceptance. d. the offeree signed an agreement that future shipments would be accepted until further notifications.

b. The offeror indicates silence will operate as acceptance.

. Robert is a charismatic pastor at United Heathen Church. One of the members of his congregation, Mrs. Smith, is a very devout believer. Robert convinces Mrs. Smith to sell him her farm for $4k. The actual value of the farm is $500k. Mrs. Smith dies and her estate sues to get her farm back. Which of the following best describes this situation? a. This case is fraud, so the estate can rescind the contract b. This is a case of undue influence, so the estate can rescind the contract c. Unless Robert can prove duress, the contract cannot be rescinded d. Mrs. Smith is a competent adult and may dispose of her property in any way, and for any price she sees fit e. None of the above

b. This is a case of undue influence, so the estate can rescind the contract

Jill asks Jack to giver her an estimate on the price of building a fence around the orchard. Jack inspects and measures Jill's apple orchard and gives Jill an estimate of $1,000. Jill agrees to the price and they sign a contract. Jill, however, had in mind a fence around her peach orchard that is much larger that the apple orchard on which Jack based his estimate. Jack says he cannot build a fence around the peach orchard for anywhere near the $1,000, but Jill wants to hold Jack to the $1,000 for a fence around the peach orchard. Which of the following statements best describes this situation? a. This is a case of mutual mistake b. This is a case of unilateral mistake c. This is a case of innocent misrepresentation d. This is a case of fraud e. None of the above

b. This is a case of unilateral mistake

John is president and sole shareholder of Photo Inc. Photo Inc. wishes to borrow money, but to do so, the bank requires John to orally guarantee to repay the loan. in his individual capacity of Photo Inc. cannot John's guaranty to repay is: a. Enforceable, because in general, guaranty contracts do not need to be in writing b. Unenforceable, because guaranty contracts need to be in writing c. Enforceable, because the main purpose of the loan and the guarantee was to benefit John, his wife and children d. Unforceable, because John is the sole shareholder of Photo, Inc.

b. Unenforceable, because guaranty contracts need to be in writing

28. An exculpatory clause releasing a white-water adventure rafting company from trading _______(page cut off) and all injuries it causes is: a. Always valid b. Usually valid for ordinary negligence, but not for international torts/acts c. Always against public policy d. An illusory promise e. All of the above

b. Usually valid for ordinary negligence, but not for international torts/acts

You go to the cosmic Runner Supply Store in Asheville. The salesperson shows you some shoes and say, "In a race, these shoes pick up the cosmic energy from the runners around you and channel it into your own legs. This causes everyone with these shoes to run twice as fast as in normal shoes." In your next race, you do only slightly better than usual and sue the store for fraud. a. You would lose because the sales person's statement was not of factual nature b. You would lose because your reliance on the sales person's statement was not justified c. You would win if most runners do not go twice as fast in the cosmic shoes d. Proving only that the salesperson intended to deceive you is enough to win your fraud case e. none of the above

b. You would lose because your reliance on the sales person's statement was not justified

Which of the following was and example discussed in class lecture of contract defense of duress? a. a single pregnant woman who was taken by the Methodists Mission Home of Texas, supported by that mission and was unduly influenced by the counselors at the mission to give up her baby for adoption b. a female investment banker whose car broke down in nevada and who argued that she was overcharged by a towtruck operator for towing services c. a young couple who took care of an elderly male neighbor and on that mans death found that he left them 10 million in his will and had disinherited his own children d. none of the above

b. a female investment banker whose car broke down in nevada and who argued that she was overcharged by a towtruck operator for towing services

Frieda is at an Oakland Raiders football game being bothered by several extremely drunk spectators in nearby seats. She asks a security officer to do something, but the security officer refuses. She then offers the security officer $100 if he'll stop the problems. He agrees, then warns the drunk spectators, after which the problems stop. Frieda refuses to pay the security officer the $100. Is there sufficient consideration in this agreement? a. Yes because the detriment of paying $100 was bargained for b. Yes because there was one party who suffered a detriment. c. No because this agreement violates public policy d. No because of the pre-existing duty rule. e. Yes, so long as 100$ is a fair price for the services of the security officer.

d. No because of the pre-existing duty rule.

. Boozer placed the following classified ad in the local newspaper "2001 chevy impaler. Runs super, aint taking nothing less than 1250 dollars for this cream puff. call otis at 123-4567, or stop by lot 17 at trixies trailer park to see the car." Larry Lagard who did not know boozer responded to the ad by stopping by the trailer park to see the car. After examining the car, Lagard offered boozer 700 for it. boozer, who was intoxicated at the time, took the offer. Lagard immediately made full payment and boozer signed over the title of the car. When boozer sobered up he learned what he did, he promptly notified lagard that he was disaffirming the contract. Lagard however, refused to return the car and wouldn't accept boozers offer to refund the purpose. assume that the car had a reasonable value at 1300, is boozer entitled to disaffirm? a. yes if boozer can show that he is an alcoholic b. no if lagard neither knew nor had reason to know of boozers intoxication c. yes regardless of whether lagard knew if boozer was drunk d. no even if lagard knew boozer was drunk and that boozer therefore couldn't understand what he was obligating himself too.

b. no if lagard neither knew nor had reason to know of boozers intoxication

63. Anne Adult (an adult) has entered into a contract with Milt Minor (a minor) under this contract, adult is to sell as stereo system to minor. Which of the following statements is accurate: a. Minor cannot effectively disaffirm/cancel the contract until he reached the age majority b. the contract can be cancelled by minor c. minor cannot effectively ratify the contract once he reaches the age of majority d. adult may cancel the contract if she so chooses

b. the contract can be cancelled by minor

Kyle sent Tara a letter offering to sell tara his car. tara left the letter on her desk where her roommate maggie saw it. Maggie read the letter and said that she wanted to take the offer. Which of the following is accurate? a. Kyle is bound to sell his car to maggie b. there is no contract between kyle and maggie because he didnt communicate his offer to her c. kyle and tara have a contract for the purchase of his car d. maggies letter is a valid acceptance of kyles offer e. both a and d

b. there is no contract between kyle and maggie because he didnt communicate his offer to her

. when is expulcatory clause valid and enforceable? a. when it attempts to exclude gross negligence b. when it attempts to exclude ordinary negligence c. when the parties have unequal bargaining power d. when it is not clearly written or readily visible e. all of the above

b. when it attempts to exclude ordinary negligence

The "mailbox rule" means that: a. Offers and acceptances must be communicated through the mail in order to be effective. b. Offers and acceptances are effective when placed in the mail. c. A properly dispatched acceptance is legally effective even if the offeror never receives d. A revocation is effective when sent by the offeror

c. A properly dispatched acceptance is legally effective even if the offeror never receives

Erin receives an offer in the mail from Susan on July 14th that says,"I will sell you my vacation home $80,000. You may accept this offer by signing the bottom of this letter and placing it in the mail so that it is postmarked by July 31st." which is true? a. Susan will be liable for punitive damages if she sells that home to anyone else prior to July 31st b. If Erin accepts the offer on July 20th by meeting the terms of the offer, she (Erin) can change her mind up until July 31st so long as Susan is notified by that date. c. Assuming Erin has not paid Susan for (or to create) an option contract, Susan may revoke the offer at any time so long as she does so before Erin accepts and Susan notifies Erin of the revocation. d. If Erin counter offers with a price of $75,000 and Susan rejects this, Erin can still create a contract by accepting the original offer by the 31st.

c. Assuming Erin has not paid Susan for (or to create) an option contract, Susan may revoke the offer at any time so long as she does so before Erin accepts and Susan notifies Erin of the revocation.

Harry (25 years old) goes into a brewpub and ask the waitperson, "Could i have a Possum Tail Ale, please?" The waitperson brings the beer and Harry in a similar fashion asks for several more, one at a time. As Harry is leaving, the waitperson says, "Wait a minute, you forgot to pay." Harry responds, "I just learned the most important thing in my business law class today. Contracts are based on promises, agreements, and a meeting of the minds, and I never promised to pay or agreed to pay for the beer. As far as I knew, you were just being nice to me by bringing me all these beers whenever I asked for one." Which is true? a. Harry need not pay because there was no agreement. b. Harry need not pay because there was no promise. c. Harry must pay because there is an implied contract d. Harry must pay because of the doctrine of unconscionability.

c. Harry must pay because there is an implied contract

Karen offered to pay Kim $25 if Kim would cut Karen's grass. Kim got her lawn mower and started to mow the lawn. After Kim was about 80% completed, Karen came out and told Kim that she had changed her mind, did not want the yard mowed, and would not pay Kim. Kim finished the job and sues Karen for the $25. What would be the probable result. a. Kim wins; this is a bilateral contract, which Kim accepted by promising to mow the lawn: Karen is bound by it. b. Karen wins; this is a unilateral contract, which Karen can revoke at any time prior to the completion of the act. c. Kim wins; this is a unilateral contract and Karen cannot revoke her offer for a reasonable period of time once Kim has made a substantial beginning to complete her performance. d. Karen wins: this is an offer for a bilateral contract and because Kim never promised to mow the lawn, there is no contract.

c. Kim wins; this is a unilateral contract and Karen cannot revoke her offer for a reasonable period of time once Kim has made a substantial beginning to complete her performance.

Dewey Cheatam Used Cars Inc. (Cheatam) mailed Lorraine Lemon a letter offering her the job of sales manager for a minimum term of one year. Cheatam' letter, dated August 11, 2007, informed Lemon that "if you decide to accept, you must accept by August 18, 2007 because my offer expires on that date." Cheatam's properly addressed letter was mailed (with sufficient postage) on August 21, 2007. Lemon contacted Cheatam the same day (Aug 21) and stated that she wished to accept the offer. Which of the following contains the best legal analysis of the facts? a. Lemon made a timely acceptance of Cheatam's offer, because the time for acceptance is customly measured from the date the offeree received the offer. b. Lemon and Cheatam have a contract because the Cheatam failed to revoke his offer prior to Lemon's acceptance of it c. Lemon has made her own offer that Cheatam is free to accept or reject. d. Lemon made a prompt and proper acceptance of Cheatam's offer, because it was not her fault that Cheatam's letter took so long to arrive

c. Lemon has made her own offer that Cheatam is free to accept or reject.

. Corpco, Inc. made Todd Technonerd an offer for a 3 month position as a computer technician. The corpco official who gave him the offer said "let us know as soon as you can, but no later than September 15." After considering the offer Technonerd telephoned the Corpco official with a counteroffer on the morning of September 10th. The corpco official said she would think over the matter. Later that same day, Sep 10, Technonerd had second thoughts about making the counteroffer, so he telephoned the Corpco official again, still Sep 10, and stated that he was "delighted to accept the Sep 8th offer." The corpco official responded by telling him that Corpco did not intend to employ him. Technonerd filed a breach of contract lawsuit against corpco. Should he win his case? a.Yes because technonerd communicated an acceptance to Corpco to the Sep. 15 date mentioned by the corpco official b. yes because corpco showed a lack of respect and consideration for Technonerd when it refused to employ him after giving him a full offer of employment c. No because Technonerds first sep 10 telephone call to the Corpco office had the effect of terminating Corpco's offer d.no even though Corpcos refusal to employ him constituted as fraud e. two of the above are correct

c. No because Technonerds first sep 10 telephone call to the Corpco office had the effect of terminating Corpco's offer

Andrea is a real estate agent, however, she does not have a license as required by statute. Andrea sells a piece of property to George, but George refuses to pay her the agreed sales commission. Andrea sues George. What is the result? a. If the licensing statute is primarily a regulatory statute (i.e., designed to protect the publicity, Andrea cannot collect her commission. b. If the licensing statute is primarily a revenue statute, Andrea cannot collect her commissions c. No matter what kind of statue, Andrea cannot collect her commission d. No matter what kind of statute, andrea can collect her commission e. None of the above

c. No matter what kind of statue, Andrea cannot collect her commission

Tuesday owned a vacant commercial building in downtown Honky Tonk, Alaska. On March 1, 2008 she promised her friend Flash that on August 1, 2008 she would give Flash legal ownership of the building. She did not ask Flash to promise or do anything in return. Flash decided that he would like to use the building, once it became his, to fulfill his longstanding dream:the operation of a retail business featuring the sale of albums, tapes and CD's. He therefore began making preparations to engage in that business. Flash spent 800$ to have the building's red doors painted black and obligated himself on contracts for purchase of $15,000 worth of albums, tapes, and CD's, so that he would have suitable inventory as well as racks for $4,000. When August 1, 2008 arrived, Tuesday refused to deed the property over to Flash because she had decided to use it for another purpose. After realizing that he could get no satisfaction out of trying to reason with Tuesday, Flash sued in an attempt to recover the amounts referred above. The following statements purport to state the "best" legal theory for Flash to use in his case. a. Quasi-contract would be the best theory for Flash to use because when Tuesday failed to confer the expected the benefit on Flash, he was unjustly harmed. b. Breach of contract, would be the best theory for Flash to use because Tuesday made an offer that Flash obviously intended to accept. c. Promissory estoppel would be the best because Flash took action in detrimental reliance on a promise that Tuesday should have foreseen as likely to induce reliance. d. The best theory for Flash to use would be that the parties had a bilateral executory contract, in view of Tuesday's failure to live up to the terms of her promise.

c. Promissory estoppel would be the best because Flash took action in detrimental reliance on a promise that Tuesday should have foreseen as likely to induce reliance.

If a judge rules that a party has lost its case because of the Statute of Frauds, the judge has essentially stated that: a. The losing party purposely deceived the other party about a material fact b. The losing party will not be allowed to introduce evidence to contradict a written agreement c. The losing party cannot enforce an oral contract that should have been in writing d. The losing party was found by the court to have lied, and will therefore lose the case e. The winning party has proven criminally fraudulent conduct on the part of the losing party

c. The losing party cannot enforce an oral contract that should have been in writing

Gerald was a subcontractor, building a contract for XYZ Corp., the general contractor. When adding up the total of materials and labor, Gerald's secretary made a clerical error with a total of $45k instead of $450k. Gerald's secretary made a clerical error with a total of $45k instead of $450k. Gerald them submitted his bid for $45k. XYZ accepted Gerald's bid of $45k, primarily because all the other bids were over $400k. When Gerald learns of his mistake, he tells XYZ that he cannot perform the contract. if XYZ sues to enforce this contract what is the most likely result? a. The contract is fully enforceable since there was a valid offer and acceptance b. This is a bilateral mistake, so either party can rescind the contract c. This is a unilateral mistake, which means the contract can be rescinded by the mistaking party. d. This is a case of economic duress and Gerald be allowed to rescind the contract e. None of the above

c. This is a unilateral mistake, which means the contract can be rescinded by the mistaking party. d. This is a case of economic duress and Gerald be allowed to rescind the contract ?????????

For this exam you were advised you would also be tested on the ethical theories handout assigned to you the first day of the course. Which of the below BEST describes behavior or a view that is consistent with the ethical model known as virtue ethics? a. recognizing that in the US it is considered a 'no-no' by most people to bribe a gov. official to further your business interests but in Cambodia or China it may be acceptable to do so b. in a 100 person firm that you own, laying off 49 of these people so that ht the remaining 51 people can survive, work and feed their families c. staying late at work, without extra pay to help a customer d. a christian priest forgiving a woman who over a simple business dispute, tortured and murdered her business partner in cold blood e. none of the above are examples are consistent with virtue ethics

c. staying late at work, without extra pay to help a customer d. a christian priest forgiving a woman who over a simple business dispute, tortured and murdered her business partner in cold blood ???

. In class and in UR one of the examples of offers was the example of a man who saw a 1995 Jaguar for 25,950 in the newspaper ad. He went to the dealership but the dealer wouldn't accept less than $37,000 so he sued the dealer. What was the outcome of the case? a.the parties took/appealed the case all the way to the US supreme court and the man(buyer) won b. the parties took/appealed the case all the way to the CA supreme court and the buyer won c. the parties took/appealed the case to the CA supreme court and the buyer lost d.the buyer was able to use the basic rules of contract law to continue to "bargain in the shadow of law" with the dealership and get the jag for even less than 25,950

c. the parties took/appealed the case to the CA supreme court and the buyer lost

In an auction where the highest bid has been made and no higher bids are forthcoming, the highest bid is treated as an acceptance in: a. Auctions with reserve, but no in auctions without reserve. b. Auctions without reserve, but not in auctions with reserve. c. In both of these kinds of auctions. d. In neither of these kinds of auctions.

d. In neither of these kinds of auctions.

Martha was selling some land she owned in Florida to Mary. Martha told Mary that there was a golf course and swimming pool in the subdivision as part of the development, and that other improvements would be made soon. Martha knew that none of these improvements existed and none were planned. Mary believed Martha and bought the land for $100k when it was really only worth $20k. Mary learns of the error and sues Martha for fraud. Which of the following statements best describes this situation? a. Mary cannot recover since the misrepresentation was not of material fact. b. Mary cannot recover since she can prove no damages c. Mary can cancel the contract since this is an innocent misrepresentation, but Mary cannot collect damages d. Mary can cancel the contract since this is fraud or recover tort damages since this fraud e. Either party can cancel the contract since this is a case of mutual mistake

d. Mary can cancel the contract since this is fraud or recover tort damages since this fraud

Sandy notices a dog tied to a chain behind a fence and recognizes it as belonging to an acquaintance who lives a couple of blocks away. Sandy goes to the acquaintance's house and says, "Your dog is tied up in someone's yard, and for $100 I will tell you where." The dog owner says, "No way! I can't believe you won't simply tell me where the dog is!" The dog owner drives around the neighborhood and finds the dog and retrieves it. The next day Sandy notices an advertisement in the paper where the owner offered a reward of $200 for information leading to the return of her dog. Sandy is: a. Entitled to $100 because she made a counteroffer to the $200 reward offer, thereby lowering the amount she can claim. b. Entitled to $200 because she gave the dog's owner information leading to the return of the dog. c. Entitled to the $200 because the owner of the dog offered to pay reward money and the reward offer was outstanding. d. Not entitled to any money because she was unaware of the original offer for a reward and the dog's owner did not accept Sandy's own offer. e. Not entitled to any money because there was no offer.

d. Not entitled to any money because she was unaware of the original offer for a reward and the dog's owner did not accept Sandy's own offer.

. At age 16, Phil bought a car from Acme Auto Co. for $2,500. In buying the car Phil told Acme his true age (16), Phil drove the car for about 6 months, and then he had an accident. The damage to the auto was $1,500. In addition, the value of the auto before the accident was only $2,000. The accident was not Phil's fault. Further, under these facts the car is not considered a "necessity." Phil wishes to disaffirm/cancel the contract. According to the study outline in your Univesity Reader book which of the following best describes this situation in the majority of states? a. Since the car was damaged, Phil cannot disaffirm the contract b. Phil can disaffirm the contract, but he can only recover $500 of his money c. Phil can disaffirm the contract, but he can recover only $2,000 of his money d. Phil can disaffirm the contract, and recover the entire $2,500 e. Phil can disaffirm the contract, but he must first have the car repaired.

d. Phil can disaffirm the contract, and recover the entire $2,500

In March 2008, while he was a junior running back at the University of Iowa, Ronnie Harmon signed a contract with sports agent Norby Walters. Pursuant to this contract, Harmon received cash, airline tickets, and a car from Walters. These items totaled $54k in value. Assume that the contract violated NCAA regulations and applicable law, and that Harmon and Walters knew this. Harmon, the top draft pick of the Buffalo Bills in 2009, later refused to employ Walters as his agents. Walter sued Harmon to collect the $54k Harmon had received from him. How should the court rule? a. that despite the contract's illegality, Harmont must repay Walters under a promissory estoppel theory b. that the contract was legal because it was of a revenue-raising nature, and that Harmon must therefore repay Walter c. that Harmon must repay Walter because it would be unconscionable to let Harmon walk away with over $54k d. That in view of the contracts illegality, neither Walter nor Harmon should receive a remedy

d. That in view of the contracts illegality, neither Walter nor Harmon should receive a remedy

Rose offered to sell a necklace to Mary for $1,000. This was a fair price but Rose really did not want to sell, she just wanted to humiliate Mary by making Mary admit that Mary could not afford it. However, Mary accepted the offer, and attempted to give Rose the $1,000 in cash, Rose refused to accept the money or convey the necklace to Mary. Rose says she was just joking. Which of the following is correct? a. If a reasonable person would have thought that Rose was making a legitimate offer, then this contract is enforceable. b. If a reasonable person would have thought that Rose was joking, then there is no contract. c. If Rose was really joking, then there is no contract regardless of what a reasonable person would have thought. d. Two of the above answers are correct. e. A, B, and C are all correct.

d. Two of the above answers are correct.

. Looking at every possible opportunity to improve his team's sagging fortunes, New Orleans Faints head coach and general manager, Mike Zitka, sent former All Pro offensive tackle Les Holden (who last played in 2007) a letter offering him a no-cut $1 million contract if he would come out of retirement and agree to play for the Faints. The letter, dated July, 9 2009, but then reconsidered. Not wanted to appear greedy, Holden mailed Zitka another properly addressed and postmarked letting on July 15th. In that letter, he stated that he agreed to accept the Faint's offer. Zitka never received Holden's July 14th counteroffer (got lost in the mail). On July 17th Zitka received Holden's letter of acceptance. On July 16th, Zitka mailed Holden this noted: "Don't bother reporting to training camp, Holden. We have too many over-the-hill players as it is." Holden received Zitka's July 16th letter on July 20th. Holden believes that he and the Faints have a contract. Do they? a. Yes, because Zitka received Holden's acceptance after he mailed Holden his own revocation. b. No, because Holden's counteroffer never arrived c. No, because Holden's counteroffer was effective on dispatch and thus operated to terminate that Faint's offer d. Yes, because Holden acceptance letter was effective on dispatch e. None of the above

d. Yes, because Holden acceptance letter was effective on dispatch

. To meet the contractual requirement, consideration exchanged between the parties to a contract must be: a. Fair and reasonable according to the reasonable person standard. b. Approximately equal in overall monetary value c. Such that each party receives a benefit d. bargained-for and have legal value. e. Recording in writing in the contract.

d. bargained-for and have legal value.

Ned Dorfman took his 2007 green amc gremlin to auto hospital (AH) and informed an AH employee that he wanted a new set of rear brakes on the car. Dorfman left the premises stating that hewould return late that day to pick up the car. The same day another customer brought in a 2007 gremlin saying he wanted it painted red for an agreed cost of 700. nearly all other reputable car painters wouldn't have charged more than 350 for the job. Confused AH employee painted Neds car and installed brakes in the other car. AH discovered what they had done when the other guy came to get his car and it hadnt been painted. When Ned came AH demanded that he pay 700 for the paint job which he had benefitted from but Ned refused even though his car looked far better than before. On these facts, AH: a. has a meritorious quasi-contract claim for 700 against ned because the paint job benefitted him b. has a meritorious quasi contract claim against ned for the reason stated above but for 350 c. has a meritorious 350 implied contract claim against ned because it would be injust not to find that Ned had an implied promise to pay for the benefit he received d. has neither a meritorious quasi-contract claim nor a meritorious implied contract claim against ned

d. has neither a meritorious quasi-contract claim nor a meritorious implied contract claim against ned

Advertising agency owner Les Dupem mailed 2009 Average State University grad Dee Ceptive a letter containing a detailed offer to employ her as an accountant executive for a minimum of two years. Besides setting forth all of the terms of his offer. Dupems letter dated june 13 and received by ceptive on june 16 stated that your acceptance will be effective when Dupem receives it. Captive mailed her acceptance on june 12. on june 18 Dupem called ceptive and told her that the offer contained in his june 13 letter was revoked. Dupem received ceptive's letter on june 19, but has refused to employ her. Ceptive sued Dupem for breach of contract. Ceptive should: a. win the case on the basis of quasi contract principles b. lose the case because dupem did not expressively authorize her to respond by mail c. win the case because mailing of an acceptance letter terminated Dupems power to revoke his offer d. lose the case because Dupem properly and timely revoked his offer

d. lose the case because Dupem properly and timely revoked his offer

. The following statements pertain in some sense to the consideration element of a contract. Which is legally accurate? a. If Renoir promises picasso that he will pay him 300 if he paints his living room and if picasso responds by saying that he'll do the work as soon as possible there is consideration to support renoir's promise b. if garth promises wayne 999 because "as far as friends go, you're out of this world wayne" the fact that garth holds the opinion about wayne constitutes garth's promise c. If lady madonna church member eleanor rigby fails to live up to her 2008 promise to donate 10K to the church, the fact that there was no consideration to support Rigbys promise will automatically prevent the church from having a valid legal claim against her for collections of all or any portion of the unpaid amount d. none of the above

d. none of the above

1. To create an enforceable contract, which of the following are needed? a. offer and acceptance b. offer and consideration c. offer, acceptance, consideration, and the applicability of the promissory estoppel doctrine d. offer, acceptance, and consideration

d. offer, acceptance, and consideration

Scarborough Fair Restaurant owner Parsley Sage wrote noted restaurant critic Rosemary Thyme and state that he would pay thyme 4,500 per day to come to his restaurant on monday Aug 4 through friday aug. 9 and tell them what they're doing right and wrong. She received the letter wednesday july 30. She decided she would go to the restaurant and provide the advice referred to in his letter. On july 31 sage called Thyme and said he wanted to revoke the offer. Thyme told sage she intended to follow through on his offer but sage was unrelenting. Thyme showed up to the restaurant on august 4 but sage directed her to leave. After sage repeatedly ignored her she filed for breach of contract. Which of the following is an accurate analysis? a. thyme should win because sage's july 31 attempt was too late to be legally effective b. thym should win the case because she properly accepted sage's offer c. sage should win because his rudeness violated the laws consideration requirement d. sage should win because he revoked his offer prior to any acceptance

d. sage should win because he revoked his offer prior to any acceptance

Susan offered to sell her couch to Martin for 200$. Martin said, "No way.... 200$ is too much and I won't pay that," and then three (3) minutes later he said that he "would give her 125$ for it." Susan said no. Then, Martin said that he would pay Susan the entire 200$. Which is true? a. Martin has accepted Susan's original offer. b. Martin's second statement that he would give Susan 125$ was a rejection of Susan's original offer. c. Martin's statement that he would give Susan $125 was an offer to Susan by Martin. d. A and B only e. B and C only

e. B and C only

Barb bought a 1999 Plymouth Valiant with 24k miles on it from Jolly John's Gently Used Car Sales. John told Barb that this car was used by a little old lady who only used it to go to church on Sundays. A couple of months later, Barb learned that the little old lady's Sunday trips were to the bingo parlor, not to church, and Barb learns that John knew this all along. The distance from the lady's house to bingo and the church are about the same. Based on the infor. Barn can probably: a. Get out of the contract on the basis of Fraud b. Get out of the contract on the basis of undue influence c. Get out of the contract on the basis of failure of consideration d. Get out of the contract on the basis of duress e. Not get out of the contract based on any of these reasons

e. Not get out of the contract based on any of these reasons

. During one of of our class session, we looked at the "fight club" case study and a contractual exculpatory clause that a bar/nightclub attempted to use as a defense to the plaintiffs claim in that case. According to class lecture, what was the result of that case? a. the plaintiff fighter sued the bar and the jury came back with a verdict in favor of the defendant bar b. the plaintiff fighter sued the bar but the jury only awarded the plaintiff $30,000 c. the ref sued the bar for failing to pay his fee and the ref lost because the court ruled that the contract unlawfully restrained trade d. the ref who ref'd the fight sued the bar for failing to pay his fee and the ref won and was able to recover his fee e. none of the above

e. none of the above