MBE Contracts Questions I

A couple, who wanted to open a pet grooming and supply store, contracted with a developer to lease space in a small strip mall that the developer was constructing. The lease was to begin on July 1, but on June 20, the developer informed the couple that the mall would not be finished nor would the space be available until August 1. The developer indicated that the first month's rent would be waived, but that, because the lease did not contain a liquidated-damages clause, he was not responsible for any damages attributable to the delay. As a consequence of the delay, the couple incurred storage costs and additional advertising expenses of $3,000, and they estimated in good faith that they lost $10,000 in sales. Which of the following amounts is the couple entitled to recover from the developer for the delay?

$3,000, the amount incurred as a consequence of the delay.

A maker of perfume contacted a manufacturer about supplying 1,000 readily available glass bottles for retail sales of the perfume. The manufacturer offered to supply the bottles and to ship them within one week. The perfumer responded, "Ship them as soon as possible." The manufacturer shipped 1,000 bottles to the perfumer five days later. The perfumer accepted the bottles and filled them with perfume. Without waiting for the manufacturer's invoice, the perfumer sent a payment to the manufacturer based on a price of $2.50 per bottle. Prior to receiving this payment, the manufacturer sent the perfumer an invoice, which reflected a charge of $3.50 per bottle. When the perfumer refused to pay $3.50 per bottle, the manufacturer returned the payment to the perfumer and initiated an action for the price. The court determined that a reasonable price for the bottles at the time of delivery was $3.25 per bottle. What amount should the court award the manufacturer per bottle?

$3.25, because this was a reasonable price for the bottles at the time of delivery.

A wholesaler of bicycle chains sent a retailer the following fax on December 1: "Because of your continued loyalty as a customer, I am prepared to sell you up to 1,000 units of Bicycle Chain Model D at $7.50 per unit, a 25% discount off our original $10.00 price. This offer will remain open for 7 days." The fax lacked a full, handwritten signature, but was on the wholesaler's letterhead and had been initialed by the wholesaler's head of sales. On December 4, the wholesaler's head of sales called the retailer and informed the retailer that he had decided to revoke his December 1 offer. On December 5, the retailer placed an order for 1,000 bicycle chains, stating that he would pay the discounted price of $7.50 per unit. What is the correct value of the order placed by the retailer?

$7,500, because the wholesaler was bound to keep the offer open for 7 days.

An honest dispute develops between a condominium owner and a plumber over whether plumbing installed in the kitchen and bathrooms of the condominium satisfied contractual specifications. If the plumbing meets those specifications, the condominium owner owes the plumber $15,000 under the terms of the contract. The condominium owner offers to pay the plumber $10,000 in satisfaction of the owner's contractual obligations, if the plumber replaces the plumbing in the kitchen with another grade of pipe. The plumber accepts the condominium owner's offer. After the plumber replaces the kitchen plumbing, the condominium owner refuses to pay the plumber. In a breach of contract action brought by the plumber, the fact-finder determines that the plumbing originally installed by the plumber did satisfy the contract specifications. The fact-finder also determines that the plumber and the condominium owner entered into a substitute agreement for which the owner failed to deliver the required performance. What is maximum amount that the plumber can seek in damages from the condominium owner?

$10,000

A retailer received a written firm offer signed by a supplier. The offer committed the supplier to providing the retailer with up to 10,000 tubes of toothpaste over the next 45 days at $1 a tube. Thirty days later, the supplier informed the retailer that the price per tube of toothpaste would be $1.10. The next day the retailer ordered 6,000 tubes of toothpaste from the supplier, which the supplier promptly shipped. Sixty days after the receipt of the offer, the retailer ordered another 4,000 tubes of toothpaste, which the supplier also promptly shipped. What price is the supplier permitted to charge the retailer for the toothpaste?

$10,400 ((6,000 * $1) + (4,000 * $1.10)), because the supplier's firm offer was effective for only 45 days.

A collector agreed to sell his collection of authentic extras' costumes from a cult classic 80's show to a costume store for $10,000, payable one month after the collection was delivered to the store via a third-party carrier. Due to the time and expense that went into accumulating and repairing the costumes, the collector expected a $2,000 profit. The costumes suffered minor water damage in transit, and the store immediately notified the collector that it was rejecting the collection and would hold the collection until the collector picked them up. The collector told the store that he would look for a new buyer and would pick up the collection in a few weeks. The collector quickly found another buyer willing to pay the original contract price. However, before the collector retrieved the costume collection, the store sold and delivered the costumes to a theater company who knowingly accepted the costumes despite the water damage. The theater company paid the store $15,000 for the collection, which the store retained. If the store's sale of the costume was NOT an acceptance, what is highest value remedy available to the collector?

$15,000, damages for conversion.

A butcher and a seller entered into a written contract for the purchase and sale of a building to be used as a butchery. The closing was scheduled for June 1. On May 25, the seller was notified by the city that the building, which had previously been used as a butchery, had a number of significant city code violations. The seller immediately contracted with an electrician and others to correct the issues. Despite his best efforts, the seller realized the building would not be brought up to code until at least June 10. The seller promptly sent written notification of this issue to the butcher and informed him that he would be unable to take possession of the building until June 10. Based on his agreement with the seller, the butcher had declined to renew his lease at his current location and was forced to remove his equipment and inventory from his current location by the end of May. Between June 1 and June 10, to prevent spoilage of his inventory due to the delay, the butcher had to rent space to store his equipment and inventory. He moved his freezer to the rented space to store his meat at a cost of $200 per day, plus the cost of electricity to run the freezer. On June 10, the building was up to code. The butcher paid the seller the agreed-upon purchase price of $300,000 and took possession of the property. What damages, if any, may the butcher recover from the seller?

$2,000, the rental cost he had to pay from June 1 to June 10.

At the beginning of the week, a homeowner met with a contractor regarding remodeling a bathroom in her home. At the conclusion of their meeting, the contractor told the homeowner that he would charge her $5,000-$6,000 for the work, but that he would get back to her with a final price. When he arrived at his office later that day, the contractor opened an email from the homeowner that she had sent earlier. In the email, she stated that she would pay the contractor $5,000 for the job. The next day, the contractor responded by email that he could not complete the work for less than $5,500. The homeowner replied by email that she couldn't pay $5,500, but that, if the contractor changed his mind, he could begin work before the end of the week. The contractor received the email, but did not respond. The contractor appeared the next day at the homeowner's house and began remodeling the bathroom. Which of the following statements regarding the relationship between the parties is most accurate?

A contract was formed at the price of $5,000.

A grocery chain whose main customer base was families with young children contacted a cereal manufacturer. After various discussions regarding the cereal and the box, the two parties entered into a written contract whereby the grocery chain would purchase 10,000 boxes of children's cereal on a monthly basis for $5,000, due upon delivery. The contract further stated that the cereal would be shaped like donuts, and each piece of cereal would be one of the seven colors of the rainbow. Finally, in listing the primary ingredients, the contract stated that the cereal would contain high fructose corn syrup. When the first shipment arrived, the grocery chain refused to pay the $5,000 and repudiated the contract. The cereal manufacturer sued the grocery chain for damages, and admitted the contract between the two parties into evidence. The grocery chain then attempted to offer evidence regarding the discussions that occurred between the two parties prior to the execution of the contract. It claimed that the cereal manufacturer had orally agreed to use evaporated cane juice as a sweetener, not high fructose corn syrup, and that the cereal manufacturer would also include a small prize in each cereal box at a cost of a penny a box. In deciding whether to admit evidence of the oral agreement, the court will most likely

Admit only the evidence regarding the small prize in each cereal box.

A tenant rented a small cabin from a landlord. The lease provided that the tenant was permitted to make structural improvements to the cabin, but that the tenant must pay for such improvements. Relying on this clause in the contract, the tenant contacted a contractor to install a loft in the cabin for $10,000. The tenant and contractor agreed in a writing signed by both parties that payment would be due 30 days after the loft was completed. The contractor knew that the tenant was renting the cabin and sent the landlord a letter informing him of the impending construction on his property. The landlord received the letter and did not reply. The contractor completed the loft, which increased the market value of the cabin by $6,000. Ten days later and three months before the end of her lease, the tenant vacated the cabin and disappeared. Thirty days after the loft was completed, the contractor's bill remained unpaid. The contractor has no remedy quasi in rem under the relevant jurisdiction's mechanic's lien statute. Which of the following will give the contractor the best chance of recovery against the landlord?

An action in quasi-contract for the benefit conferred to the landlord.

A homeowner entered into oral contracts with both a painter and a landscaper to perform services at his home. The landscaper was the first to begin the services, and shortly after he began to work, he realized that the type of soil in the homeowner's yard would cause the projected cost of the work to increase dramatically. After the homeowner realized how high the cost of the landscaping services were going to be, he called the painter to tell her that he could not go through with their contract at that time. The painter stated that she had already purchased paint and brushes for the job, as well as painted glass to create a small, artistic mosaic on a back corner of the house as a sort of signature expression she planned to begin using. She had also paid for a temporary city permit to park her utility van on the residential street where the homeowner lived. Which of the following would not be a possible liability for the homeowner?

Cost of the glass

At the auction of construction equipment owned by a contractor, several lots were offered for bidding and the highest bids for each were accepted by the auctioneer. The auctioneer then announced that a lot that consisted of a backhoe was being auctioned off. Several bids for the backhoe were acknowledged by the auctioneer. Just before the auctioneer brought down her gavel, she glanced at the contractor. The contractor gave the auctioneer a prearranged signal. Acting in accord with the signal, the auctioneer stated that the backhoe was being removed from the auction. There had been no indication as to whether the auction was being held with or without reserve. The highest bidder on the backhoe, contending that he is now its owner, has brought suit against the contractor. How should the court rule?

For the contractor, because the auctioneer had not brought down the gavel, announcing the completion of the sale of the backhoe.

A new florist placed a written order with a wholesaler for $15,000 worth of fresh flowers. Delivery was to be made to the florist's shop via a national delivery service. Because the florist was a new customer, the wholesaler accepted the order on the condition that he pay $5,000 in advance, and the remaining $10,000 within 20 days of delivery. There was no discussion as to who bore the risk of loss. The wholesaler arranged with a national delivery service to pick up and deliver the flowers to the florist. The delivery service picked up the flowers, but, due to malfunction of the temperature controls on the transporting plane, the flowers were worthless upon arrival. The florist rejected the flowers and notified the wholesaler, who refused to ship other flowers. The wholesaler filed a claim against the florist for the remaining $10,000. The florist counterclaimed for the return of its $5,000 payment to the wholesaler. How should the court rule on these claims?

Grant the florist's claim for $5,000 and deny the wholesaler's claim for $10,000 because the risk of loss remained with the wholesaler.

A recent college graduate offered to buy all of the computers from a struggling online retailer for which he had been an intern during college. The terms of the written agreement were such that the graduate would pay $10,000 for a "reasonable number of computers, as the closing retailer no longer needed them." Due to the graduate's internship with the retailer, he knew that there were 50 computers in the office and knew that nearly all of them were unused, so he believed he would receive all 50 computers once the retailer closed. He gave the retailer a check for $10,000 and in return, took ten computers from the office that day. With the help of the $10,000 and a sudden upswing in sales in the online retail market, the retailer became profitable. When the graduate demanded the remaining 40 computers, the retailer refused. Instead, the retailer returned the $10,000 to the graduate and demanded the return of the ten computers in the graduate's possession. The graduate sued the retailer for breach of contract. The retailer moved to dismiss and argued that no valid contract existed. How should the court rule?

Grant the motion, because there was no agreement as to quantity.

An independent trucker and a manufacturer entered a contract for the delivery of a farming implement from the manufacturer to a farmer. Under the terms of the written contract, the trucker promised "to deliver a farming implement from the manufacturer to the farmer," and the manufacturer promised "to pay the trucker if the trucker delivers the implement directly to the farmer after picking it up." The trucker picked up the implement, but instead of driving directly to the farmer, drove 100 miles out of his way to pick up another item from a third party before delivering the implement to the farmer. The manufacturer, unaware that the trucker failed to deliver the implement directly to the farmer, refused to pay the trucker. Who has breached this contract?

Neither the trucker nor the manufacturer.

A woman emailed her friend, stating that she would like to buy the friend's teacup collection when "times aren't so tough. I would pay $1,000 for them." The friend responded with an email agreeing to the deal. The women did not exchange money or the teacups and did not see each other until a year later. When they did see each other, the friend apologized for forgetting about their discussion and told the woman she would deliver the teacups the next weekend and would accept a check at that time. The woman said she did not remember the discussion but would pay $750 for the teacups. The friend responded, "Haven't we already discussed this? Sold." The next day, the friend turned the teacups over to the woman, who provided her with a check for $750. The friend immediately responded that she needed the check for the remaining $250. The woman kept the teacups. Is the woman liable for the remaining $250?

No, because a contract was not formed until the day the women spoke in person.

A general contractor was preparing a bid to build a "green home" designed to be environmentally friendly and sustainable. The general contractor received five bids from subcontractors ranging from $22,000 to $29,000 for the installation of solar panels on the roof of the house. In computing his own bid, the general contractor used the lowest bid of $22,000 for installation of the solar panels. The general contractor was awarded the contract to build the green home. After winning the bid, another solar panel installer approached the general contractor and offered to install the solar panels for $20,000. The general contractor entered into a contract with this installer to mount solar panels onto the roof of the green home. The subcontractor who submitted the $22,000 bid sued the general contractor for breach of contract. Will he succeed?

No, because his bid was never accepted.

A math tutor entered into an agreement with a father to provide one month of tutoring for the father's son. The agreement stated that the math tutor would provide lessons for the son twice a week during the month for eight lessons at a total cost of $1,000. The cost included the materials valued at $350 that the math tutor intended to purchase from a particular educational services provider. The father knew a salesman for the educational services provider and notified him that his company should expect a sale in the next week. As the educational services provider was a new company without many sales, the salesman was excited at the prospect. A week after the agreement between the math tutor and the father was executed, the math tutor informed the father that he would not tutor the son unless the father provided an additional $250. The father refused. The educational services provider subsequently brought an action against the math tutor for breach of the agreement between the math tutor and the father. Will the educational services provider prevail?

No, because it was only an incidental beneficiary of the agreement.

A car salesman on the lot at a car dealership specializing in expensive high-end vehicles called out with a megaphone, "Free set of wheels to the next person who buys a car from me!" He was surrounded by stacks of tires and a display case with informational pamphlets advertising all-weather tires. A customer, believing that the car salesman was offering a two-for-one deal on the expensive vehicles sold on the lot, immediately approached the salesman and purchased a new vehicle for his son, believing that he would have a nice new car to give to his daughter as well. The salesman then asked if the customer would like his free set of tires installed on the new car. The customer responded that he did not want the tires, and that the salesman was contractually obligated to give him a second car. The salesman laughed and said that he was never offering a free car, but would cancel the sale of the first car as a consolation. Is the salesman obligated to give the customer a free car?

No, because no reasonable person would believe that the salesman was offering a free car.

A comic-book collector entered into a written contract with a man who had just inherited a large collection of comic books. They agreed that the man would sell to the collector numerous rare comic books for $4,000. Before they signed the agreement, the collector e-mailed the man to ask if he would include a particularly rare issue of Batman in the sale. The man agreed by e-mail that he would. The contract contained a list of each comic book that was supposed to be part of the sale, but the list did not include the Batman issue. The contract also stated that it was "the complete and final agreement" between the man and the collector. When the collector received the comic books, he discovered that the shipment did not include the Batman comic book. He sued the man, stating that even though the written contract did not mention the particular Batman issue, the collector had relied on the promise of the issue when he signed the contract. At trial, the collector seeks to introduce the e-mail he sent to the man prior to the execution of the agreement that referenced the Batman comic book. Is the e-mail admissible?

No, because of the parol-evidence rule.

A gardener and a carpenter contracted in writing for the carpenter to repair the gardener's four identical beehives for $500 each. The contract was signed by both parties and provided that the gardener would pay the carpenter $2,000 upon delivery of the fourth repaired beehive. The gardener immediately delivered all four beehives to the carpenter for repair. The carpenter repaired and delivered the first two beehives without any problems and without demanding payment. However, upon delivery of the third repaired beehive, the carpenter demanded a payment of $1,500. Is the gardener required to make the demanded payment at this time?

No, because she has no duty to pay the carpenter anything until the last beehive is repaired and delivered.

The owner of a coffee shop saw the work of an eccentric local artist at an art show. The owner discovered that the artist operated a small interior decorating business and, wanting the artist's unique style reflected in her own business, hired the artist to decorate her coffee shop. A week before the artist was scheduled to decorate the coffee shop, the artist sold her decorating business to a young art school graduate and delegated all of her outstanding contracts to him. The graduate took over all financial and creative management of the business. If the coffee shop owner refuses to accept performance by the art school graduate, is the owner liable for breach of contract?

No, because the artist's duty under the contract involved her taste and skill.

A baker and a bride-to-be entered into a contract in which the baker agreed to bake the wedding cake for the bride's wedding at a cost of $2,500. The contract contained a clause that read: "An express condition of Bride's performance under the Contract is Baker's satisfaction of Bride's aesthetic expectations in the design of her wedding cake." In keeping with the wedding's butterfly theme, the baker constructed an elegant cake accented with colorful butterflies, flowers, and caterpillars. At the wedding reception, the guests were enthralled by the cake. The bride, however, upset over the inclusion of the caterpillars, to which she had a genuine aversion, refused to pay the baker. The baker sued the bride for $2,500. Should the court require the bride to pay the baker?

No, because the bride was personally and honestly dissatisfied with the cake.

On April 1, a buyer agreed in writing to purchase an antique car from a seller for $20,000. The parties met on April 10, the scheduled date of the sale, at which time the buyer accepted the car and gave the seller a check for $15,000. The buyer, seeking to create an accord and satisfaction, had added the following conspicuous notation to the check: "This check is in full and final satisfaction of my obligation under our April 1 agreement." The seller did not realize that the check was for only $15,000 and that it contained the notation until the seller sought to deposit it at her bank later that day. Needing the money, the seller deposited the check anyway. If the seller sues the buyer for breach of contract seeking damages of $5,000, the difference between the amount paid and the contract price, will the buyer's accord and satisfaction defense likely succeed?

No, because the buyer did not dispute the initial purchase price of the car

A caterer contracted with a local farmer for the delivery of three dozen fresh local eggs. The contract provided that because the caterer used the sterilized egg shells to serve one of her signature dessert recipes, the eggs needed to be a uniform color. The farmer delivered the caterer 20 white eggs and 16 speckled eggs. The caterer immediately e-mailed the farmer and informed him that she was rejecting the eggs because she could not use the inconsistent shells to serve her desserts. She also told him she could either sell them for him or save them for him to retrieve, and that she would wait for his instructions. The caterer saved the eggs for a week while she waited for the farmer's instructions, but he never responded. Finally, concerned that the eggs would spoil soon, she gave them to a friend. If the farmer brings a contract claim against the caterer for the contract price of the eggs she gave to her friend, will he succeed?

No, because the caterer did not accept the eggs.

Prior to her death, a celebrity commissioned an artist to paint a portrait of her. The celebrity hired this particular artist because he only painted using an old-fashioned and rarely used style that required two months of daily appointments during which the subject would sit for the painting over a few hours each day. The contract between the parties specified that this live-model method be used, and that the celebrity would deliver increasing payments throughout the process, with the first payment occurring after two weeks of painting. One week into the process, after the painting had begun, the celebrity died. Her family demanded that the artist continue with the painting, using photographs as a substitute for the daily sessions. Is the artist required to complete a painting of the celebrity?

No, because the celebrity died after only one week.

A chemistry professor offered to sell her colleague an autographed first edition novel for $1,000. The professor provided her colleague with a signed written statement specifying the terms of the offer, and stating that the offer would remain open for one week. Two days later, the colleague learned that the professor had sold the book to someone else in their department. The next day, the colleague showed up at the professor's office with $1,000, asking to purchase the book. The professor apologized, saying that the book had already been sold. Is the colleague likely to succeed in an action for breach of contract?

No, because the colleague learned that the book had been sold before accepting the offer.

A mining company contracted with a railroad to transport 10,000 tons of coal from the company's mines to a power company at a cost of $100,000. The railroad told the mining company that the coal would arrive at the power company on June 1, but the contract contained a clause that the railroad would not be liable for any losses suffered by the mining company as a result of a late shipment. The railroad was aware that the mining company had contracted with the power company to deliver the coal on June 1, and pursuant to standard industry custom, the price to be paid by the power company decreased by $1 per ton for each day that the coal was late. The shipment of coal did not reach the power company until June 11, and the railroad had no justification for the 10-day delay. Because of the delay, the mining company lost $100,000 in revenue from the sale. The mining company filed suit against the railroad for breach of contract, claiming $100,000 in damages. Is the mining company likely to succeed in its claim?

No, because the contract between the mining company and the railroad protected the railroad from losses suffered by the mining company due to a late shipment.

A wheat farmer contacted an agricultural services company in May to inquire about hiring workers for a five-day period toward the beginning of the summer-long harvest season to assist the farmer in harvesting his wheat crop. After some negotiations, the farmer entered into a written contract with the company to provide five workers for a five-day period starting in the first week of June for a cost of $5,000. On June 5, the company's workers went on strike. On June 9, the strike ended and the company's workers began harvesting wheat on the farmer's farm, and did so for five days. The farmer subsequently refused to pay the company, claiming the company's delay in performance excused his obligation to pay. Is the farmer's obligation to pay excused?

No, because the contract did not contain a "time is of the essence" clause.

The owner of a fur coat stored it with the furrier from whom she bought the coat during the warm months of the year. While the coat was at the furrier, a salesperson, mistakenly thinking that the coat was for sale, sold it to a customer. The customer was allowed to reduce the purchase price by the amount of an outstanding debt owed by owner of the furrier to the customer; the customer paid the remainder in cash. In the process of purchasing the coat, the customer was told by the salesperson about the furrier's storage service, but, like the salesperson, was unaware that the coat was not part of the store's merchandise. After the sale, the owner learned of the transaction between the furrier and the customer. Since the coat had significant sentimental value to the owner, the owner sought its return from the customer. When the customer refused, the owner filed an action to recover the coat from the customer. Will the owner prevail?

No, because the customer was a good faith purchaser of the coat that had been entrusted to the furrier.

As part of a divorce settlement, an ex-husband purchased from an insurance company an annuity to be paid at a fixed amount quarterly over the life of his ex-wife. (An annuity contract requires the payment of a fixed amount periodically for the duration of a person's life.) Within a week after the purchase, the ex-wife learned that she had a fatal illness, which had not previously manifested itself, but had existed for some time. She died two months later, prior to receiving any payments from the annuity. The ex-husband filed suit to rescind the annuity contract. Will he be successful?

No, because the ex-husband assumed the risk of his ex-wife's death.

In January, a local farmer contracted with a chef to sell the chef a specified amount of local organic tomatoes to be delivered on August 1. On June 15, the farmer called the chef to tell him that part of his crop was infested with tomato fruitworms, and he was unsure that he would be able to deliver the full amount requested by August 1. The chef told the farmer that it was absolutely essential that he receive those tomatoes on time to make organic tomato sauce for a restaurant scheduled to open in August. The farmer assured him that he would do his very best to save the crop and deliver by August 1. Does the chef have valid legal grounds to cancel the contract and order tomatoes from another source?

No, because the farmer did not state unequivocally that he could not deliver the tomatoes on time.

The owner of a restaurant who highlighted local ingredients when creating his menu bought cheese and other dairy products from a local dairy farmer. The owner and the farmer had entered into written requirements contracts each spring for the past ten years. In the winter of the tenth year, the farmer purchased a substantial amount of new dairy cows and expanded his farming capabilities. He notified all customers that he would have a higher volume and amount of available products the following spring, and would adjust deliveries accordingly. The owner responded with a date he wished for the products to be delivered, as per custom, but said nothing else. On the agreed upon date, the farmer delivered substantially more products than he would customarily provide. The owner attempted to accept half of the shipment, as that was roughly his customary quantity, but the farmer stated that the products were already packaged and that the owner should have spoken up after receiving the notice from the farmer. The owner then rejected the shipment in its entirety. Did the owner breach the contract with the farmer as to this shipment?

No, because the farmer made a nonconforming tender of goods.

On March 1, the owner of a ferry boat that operated only during daylight hours during the summer months of June, July, and August entered into a written agreement with a man to serve as the captain of the boat for the upcoming season. On May 1, the owner contracted with a woman to serve as the captain of the boat. On May 30, the man was diagnosed with an illness, and the treatment for this illness prevented him from being employed until the following year. On May 31, the owner, learning of the man's illness, told him not to worry about their contract, as he had found someone else to serve as captain of the ferry boat. The woman served as captain of the ferry boat for the summer months of June, July, and August that year. On September 1, the man sued the owner for damages based on a breach of their contract. Will his suit succeed?

No, because the man was unable to serve as the captain of the boat during the summer months.

At a local market, a buyer offered to purchase a large, framed mirror from an artist for $1,000. The artist stated that he wanted to wait to see how many people went through the market that day before he decided on whether he would accept the offer. The next morning, the buyer returned to the market only to learn that the mirror had been dropped and broken. Because the frame of the mirror was still in good condition, the buyer wrote a check for $500 and gave it to the artist without further remark. The artist loaded the frame into the buyer's vehicle and demanded the remaining $500 offered the day before. Is the buyer liable for the remaining $500?

No, because the original offer terminated.

The owner of a rare eighteenth-century chest offered to sell it to a connoisseur of antiques for $75,000. The connoisseur countered that she would buy the chest for $50,000. The owner rejected this price. The owner and the connoisseur then executed a written agreement for the sale of the chest at a price to be determined only by an antiques dealer whose expertise in valuing this rare item they both trusted. The dealer examined the chest. He told the owner and the connoisseur that he had to do further research on the chest, but that he would let them know his decision in several days. Unfortunately, the dealer died before doing so. A reasonable price can be established for the chest by the court. Is there likely an enforceable contract?

No, because the owner and the connoisseur did not intend to be bound unless the dealer set the price of the chest.

A shoe manufacturer contends that the owner of a shoe store called and ordered 50 pairs of Oxford-style dress shoes at $100 per pair to be shipped within three weeks and that the manufacturer's representative immediately accepted this order. The manufacturer promptly sent the owner a signed, written acknowledgment of the alleged order that reflected the manufacturer as seller and the shoe store owner as buyer, as well as the number and style of shoes, but that did not indicate the price of the shoes. The owner admits to receiving the acknowledgment the following day and taking no action regarding it. Two weeks later, the owner received a shipment of 50 pairs of Oxford-style dress shoes. The owner immediately called the manufacturer and asserted that he had never ordered the shoes. Will the Statute of Frauds prevent the manufacturer from enforcing this contract against the owner?

No, because the owner received and did not respond to the written acknowledgment in a timely manner.

The owner of a beauty products store mentioned to a long-time customer that she was selling her car. The storeowner showed the customer, who was a sales representative at a clothing store, a picture of the vehicle and told her its year, make, model, and mileage. When the customer expressed an interest, the storeowner gave her the keys and told her to check it out for herself. The customer took the keys, looked over the inside and the outside of the car, and drove it around the block. When the customer returned to the store, the storeowner honestly stated that she knew little about cars and was selling the car with all its faults. The customer indicated that she also knew little about cars. The storeowner and the customer agreed upon a price of several thousand dollars for the car. Several days after the customer paid for the car and took ownership of it, she learned that the car required a costly engine overhaul that neither the storeowner nor the customer was aware of at the time of the sale. The customer has filed a lawsuit against the storeowner for breach of the warranty of merchantability. Is the customer likely to be successful?

No, because the storeowner was not a merchant.

While attending a rodeo on August 20, a hat maker entered into a valid, written agreement with the rodeo manager to make 500 leather cowboy hats for an upcoming rodeo event at a price of $75 per hat. Per the agreement, the rodeo manager agreed to pay one-fourth of the total purchase price to a tannery owner to whom the hat maker owed a debt for a previous leather order. On August 25, the hat maker changed his mind about paying one-fourth of the purchase price to the tannery owner. The hat maker and rodeo manager subsequently executed a valid modification of the original agreement. The rodeo manager's brother was also present on August 20 when the original agreement was executed, but he did not know about the August 25 modification of the agreement to no longer pay the tannery owner. On August 30, the brother, who was friends with the tannery owner, called and told him that his debt from the hat maker would finally be paid off. However, the rodeo manager refused to pay one-fourth of the purchase price to the tannery owner. If the tannery owner sues the rodeo manager for one-fourth of the purchase price, will he recover?

No, because the tannery owner did not rely on the August 20 agreement between the hat maker and the rodeo manager.

A math major at a local college agreed to tutor a high school student who was having trouble in his math class. The tutor promised to meet with the student for five hours a week for the remaining 2 months of the term, and the student's mother agreed to pay the tutor $20 per hour. In addition, the parties agreed that, if the student received a B or better in his math class, the mother would pay the tutor a $500 bonus. The parties did not reduce their agreement to writing. The mother paid the tutor weekly for the tutoring. At the end of the term, the student received a B+ in his math class. The mother, not having the funds to pay the tutor's bonus, contacted the tutor and offered her a bike worth $300 in lieu of the bonus payment. The tutor accepted the bike. Is the tutor entitled to recover the remaining $200?

No, because the tutor accepted the bike instead of the bonus.

A homeowner entered into a contract with a landscaper. The contract specified that the homeowner would pay the landscaper $10,000 upon completion of a list of projects. The landscaper performed the work while the homeowner was away on vacation. When the landscaper sought payment, the homeowner refused, noting that a tree had not been trimmed as required by the contract. The landscaper responded that, since he would now have to forego other work in order to trim the tree, he would do it but only if the homeowner agreed to pay him a total of $10,500 for his services. The homeowner, desperate to have the work completed, agreed. Once the work was completed, however, the homeowner gave the landscaper a check for $10,000, and refused to pay more. The landscaper sued for breach of contract. Is the landscaper likely to succeed in his claim?

No, because there was no consideration for the promise to pay $10,500 and no unanticipated circumstances arose.

A builder ordered 100 squares of shingles from a home-supply store for installation on the roofs of homes that he was building. The builder agreed to a price of $120 per square. Delivery was set for no later than noon on the following Monday to the construction site. The truck from the store with the ordered shingles arrived at 1:00 p.m. the following Monday. The builder rejected the shipment due to its failure to arrive on time. The store, which regularly sold 600 squares of shingles per week, resold the squares that had been rejected by the builder, at a price of $110 per square. The store would have made a profit of $3,000 had the builder accepted the shingles. If the store sues the builder for breach of contract, how much can the store recover from the builder?

Nothing

A company leased office space in a downtown building and subsequently entered into a written contract with a supplier to purchase furniture for the office. Among the provisions in the contract was the following: "This document contains the entire and final agreement of the parties. It supersedes any prior agreements, understandings, or negotiations, whether written or oral." A dispute subsequently arose over the tables and desks delivered by the supplier. The contract called for "cherry tables and desks" of designated designs. The company contended that the word "cherry" indicated the type of wood that the tables and desks were made of. The supplier, having delivered tables and desks made of a less expensive wood and finished with a cherry veneer, asserted that the use of the word "cherry" referred to the appearance of these items and did not require that the furniture be made solely of cherry wood. In the litigation of this dispute, the company sought to introduce a statement made by the supplier during negotiations that the tables and desks were of "solid-wood construction." In determining whether the contract was a total integration of the agreement between the company and the supplier, which of the following rules should the court apply?

The "certainly included" rule

On May 10, the coach of a youth league baseball team sent a letter to a supplier asking the supplier to promptly ship 20 red jerseys to him. On May 15, the supplier received this letter and sent the coach a reply letter accepting the offer. On May 16, the supplier realized that he had no red jerseys with which to fill the order, and sends the coach 20 blue jerseys with a note that the blue jerseys were tendered as an accommodation. The coach received the jerseys and accommodation note on May 18, and received the supplier's acceptance letter on May 19. On May 20, which of the following is a correct statement of the parties' legal rights and duties?

The coach can either accept or reject the blue jerseys and, in either event, recover damages, if any, for breach of contract.

The owner of a retail clothing store regularly displayed for-sale works by local artists on a wall in the store. An art collector who came into the store inquired about purchasing a particular work for display at his home. The two agreed upon a price, but the collector was not ready to commit to purchasing it immediately. Confident that the collector would purchase the work, the owner promised in a signed writing to sell the work to the collector at the agreed-upon price at any time before the end of the month. On the last day of the month, the collector sent the owner a check for the agreed upon price, which the owner received on the following day. If the owner returns the collector's check and refuses to sell the artwork to the collector, which of the following best supports the owner's position that a contract had not been formed?

The collector's acceptance of the owner's offer was not timely.

A construction company contracted with a manufacturer to purchase 100 identical prefabricated windows to use while constructing houses in a gated community. The windows were to be delivered in shipments of 25 windows each on April 1, May 15, July 1, and August 15. The written contract, signed by both parties, was silent as to when payment for each shipment would be due. The manufacturer made the first two shipments in conformity with the contract requirements, and the construction company paid one-fourth of the full contract price upon each delivery. However, on June 1, the manufacturer demanded that the construction company pay the entire remainder of the contract price before the manufacturer would make any further shipments. Which of the following statements is true?

The construction company must pay the manufacturer one-fourth of the contract price upon delivery of each conforming shipment of windows.

A jeweler and a goldsmith signed a written agreement that provided as follows: "For $3,000, the goldsmith shall sell to the jeweler a size six gold ring setting that the jeweler shall select from only the goldsmith's white gold ring designs." The agreement did not address any other specific terms with regard to the business arrangement between the jeweler and the goldsmith. When the jeweler arrived to select a ring, he refused to select one, claiming that the goldsmith, immediately prior to the execution of the written agreement, had orally agreed to broaden his choices to also include rose gold ring designs. The jeweler claimed that the goldsmith had, at the same time, also orally agreed to include a set of earring settings, valued at $1,000, as an incentive for his continued business. The goldsmith refused to sell to the jeweler any of his rose gold ring designs or include the earring settings. If the jeweler sues the goldsmith for damages, how should the court handle the evidence of the alleged oral agreements?

The court should admit the evidence as to the earring settings but not the option to choose a rose gold ring design.

A dancer signed a contract with a traveling circus to travel and perform as an aerialist for six months. The contract provided that the dancer would be paid $500 per week and would be guaranteed employment for the full six months, with an option to renew the contract for the next traveling season. Excited for the opportunity to perform for a traveling circus, the dancer turned down an invitation to dance with a theatre group for the same time period as the circus contract. After two weeks of traveling and dancing for the circus, the dancer sprained her ankle and was briefly hospitalized for one week. The circus was forced to hire another aerialist. After an additional week, the dancer's doctor gave her approval to return to work, but the circus refused to honor the remainder of the contract. The dancer brought an action against the circus for breach of contract. If the dancer wants to recover the highest possible amount of damages, which of the following is the dancer's best legal theory?

The dancer's failure to perform for two weeks was not a material breach of the contract.

A homeowner entered into a written contract with a contractor to construct an elaborate tree house among the large trees located in the homeowner's backyard. After commencing construction of the tree house, the contractor discovered that one of the trees intended to be used as support for the tree house had a relatively common fungal infection in its core that would cause the strength of the tree's branches to falter if left untreated. Neither the homeowner nor the contractor had knowledge of the fungal infection when they entered into the contract, but the contractor knew that such infections were common in the area and did not request an inspection of the trees before entering the contract. The contractor also knew that treatment was available at a high cost, but even after treatment, he would need to create additional heavy-load bearing supports for the tree at a substantial cost. When the contractor informed the homeowner that he would not perform under the contract unless the homeowner provided at least 75% of the additional costs needed to make the structure safe, the homeowner refused to pay the additional amount. The homeowner then sued the contractor for breach of contract. What is the likely result?

The homeowner wins, because the contractor assumed the risk of the fungal infection.

A homeowner met with a number of general contractors regarding significant renovations on his home. After a couple of successful meetings with one particular contractor, the contractor sent a letter to the homeowner stating that the contractor would perform the renovation work for $10,000. The homeowner responded with a letter stating that he would "only pay $8,500 and not more." Upon receiving the homeowner's letter, the contractor immediately commenced preparations for the renovation work, including beginning to acquire the materials necessary to complete the renovation. One week after beginning work on the homeowner's home, the contractor realized the renovation would cost $1,600 more than he anticipated due to the homeowner's very particular aesthetic requirements. After being informed of the higher cost, the homeowner refused to pay the contractor any amount over $8,500. The contractor promptly discontinued working on the renovation. The homeowner subsequently brought a breach of contract action against the contractor, seeking damages. Which party will prevail?

The homeowner, because the homeowner's offer was effectively accepted by commencement of performance

A licensing agreement provided that a manufacturer could use an inventor's patent in manufacturing its products for ten years. Immediately thereafter, the inventor assigned his rights to receive payments pursuant to the licensing agreement to a corporation in which he was the controlling shareholder. The inventor did not receive compensation for this assignment. The inventor, upon his death five years later, devised his stock in the corporation to his daughter, and all of his remaining property to his son. To whom should the manufacturer make its payments under the licensing agreement?

The inventor's son

A man was moving to another state and decided that he wanted to give away some of his belongings. He knew his brother had always expressed interest in an antique desk. The man called his brother and said, "I'm going to be moving in two weeks. I would like to give you the antique desk as a gift. I'll drop it off at your house on my way out of town." The brother told the man that he was very grateful for the gift and was looking forward to having the desk in his home office. The brother immediately disposed of his old desk and made room for the antique one. A couple of days later, an appraiser, who was a friend of the man, visited the man's house for dinner. While at his house, he saw the antique desk and informed the man that it was worth well over $20,000. The man decided to keep the desk and did not drop it off at the brother's house on his way out of town. The brother brought suit against the man to recover the antique desk. If the court finds in favor of the man on these facts, what is the most likely reason?

The man's refusal to give the piece of furniture did not cause injustice.

At lunch with two co-workers, the owner of a bike offered to sell it to his manager for $100. His manager replied, "That ancient thing? I'll give you $50 for it." The owner's assistant then stated, "I'll buy it for $75." Immediately after the owner responded, "OK," the manager said, "Wait a minute. How old is it?" When the owner replied, "Two years old," the manager said, "OK, I'll buy it for $100." Which of the following statements is true?

The owner must sell the bike to his assistant for $75.

The owner of a bed and breakfast hired an artist to paint nature-themed murals in each of the five bedrooms. The contract provided that payment was due upon the satisfactory completion of all five rooms. The owner told the artist that each mural should relate to the name of the bedroom, but otherwise gave the artist broad discretion in designing each mural. When the owner checked the artist's progress a few weeks later, she found that although the murals in the three completed rooms related to the theme of the rooms, the color choices clashed with the overall décor of the bed and breakfast. The owner told the artist that she would accept his performance on the first three rooms, but asked the artist to incorporate a different color palette in the remaining rooms. The artist, unwilling to compromise his artistic autonomy, refused to paint the remaining two rooms and immediately terminated the contract. What is the artist entitled to recover from the owner of the bed and breakfast?

The reasonable value of the artist's services in painting the first three rooms, less any damages the owner may suffer from the artist's failure to paint the last two rooms.

On January 5, a buyer and seller contracted for the delivery of 100 widgets if they could be delivered by February 20. The agreement was made in a writing signed by both parties and provided that the buyer would pay the contract price of $1,000 upon delivery. On February 3, the buyer and seller orally agreed to postpone delivery until March 1. However, when the widgets arrived on March 1, the buyer refused to accept or pay for the widgets. If the seller sues the buyer for breach of contract, who is most likely to succeed in the action?

The seller, because the oral agreement on February 3 waived the February 20 delivery date.

A private port authority contracted with a crane operating company to assist with loading and unloading containers from ships docked at the port. One of the company's cranes was defectively manufactured. Due to this defect, a container was dropped. The container tumbled down a hill, crashed through a fence, and struck a passerby. The passerby sued the port authority alleging negligence. Neither the passerby nor the port authority notified the crane operating company of this lawsuit. The port authority settled its claim with the passerby before trial for a reasonable amount. The port authority seeks to recover the cost of the settlement from the crane operating company under a breach of contract action. Of the following, which would be the crane operating company's best defense?

The settlement was not reasonably foreseeable at the time the contract was formed.

A maker of hand-woven rugs contracted with a supplier to provide yarn made from sheep's wool. The written contract specified that, for four years, the supplier would provide the rug maker with 2,000 spools of yarn made from 100% sheep's wool per month, at $10 per spool, for a total of $20,000. Two years into the contract, the supplier sent 2,000 spools of yarn to the rug maker made from 90% sheep's wool and 10% synthetic fiber. The rug maker sent a check to the supplier for $15,000 for the shipment, and added a clear note on the check stating that the payment was in full for the shipment, but was $5,000 less due to the synthetic fiber in the yarn. The supplier promptly deposited the check, and then four months later filed suit against the rug maker for the remaining $5,000. The supplier has submitted evidence of the written contract, and the rug maker has submitted evidence of the deposited check. What is the rug maker's best defense in this situation?

The supplier deposited the check for $5,000 less than the contract price, thereby discharging the rug maker of any further duty to pay the remaining amount for that month's shipment.

A refrigeration-unit manufacturer contracted with a kitchen appliance store to sell and deliver 100 refrigeration units to the store at a price substantially lower than market value. The written and signed contract included the term "F.O.B. kitchen appliance store, on or before March 30." Due to an unforeseen strike by the shipping company, the manufacturer delivered the units to the store on April 18. The store suffered no material harm due to the delay. The refrigeration appliance industry generally allows appliance manufacturers a 30-day leeway for any contractually specified time of delivery, unless such leeway is expressly forbidden by the contract. If the store brings suit against the manufacturer for breach of contract, which of the following facts provides the manufacturer with the strongest defense?

There is evidence of a trade usage in the refrigeration appliance industry allowing a 30-day leeway for appliance deliveries.

A student inherited a large tract of land from an eccentric uncle. The student had no present need for the land, and because he had numerous student loans, he decided to sell the land. He advertised a proposed sale of the property, and he was soon contacted by a rancher who owned property adjacent to the offered land. The rancher wanted to purchase the student's property to expand his ranch and to build facilities for dairy production. The student told the rancher that his car had just broken down, and that he was eager to sell the property quickly so that he could repair his car for his commute to class. Although the rancher was fully aware of the fair market value of the property, he offered the student a cash price 80 percent lower than the property was worth. The student, disappointed with the low price but desperate to repair his car, accepted the rancher's offer. On these facts, which of the following legal concepts would give the student the best chance of canceling the contract with the rancher?

Unconscionability

On April 1, a buyer and a seller executed a written contract for the sale of an antique car for $40,000, delivery on May 1. As they each signed the contract, the buyer orally reminded the seller that the buyer's duty to purchase the car was conditioned on his ability to get approval for a loan by April 20 to fund the purchase. The seller orally agreed, though the condition was not noted in the written contract. When the seller contacted the buyer to execute the sale on May 1, he discovered that the buyer attempted but failed to get a loan and cannot afford to purchase the car. The buyer refused to honor the contract. The contract contains a clause indicating that it is a total integration of the parties' agreement. If the seller sues the buyer for breach of contract, will the court admit the evidence of the oral condition regarding the buyer's approval for a loan?

Yes, as proof of a condition precedent to the buyer's obligation under the contract.

A jeweler who specialized in engagement rings assisted a man who was trying to pick out the perfect engagement ring. The man was inexperienced with the various cuts of diamonds and types of ring settings. Over the course of a few weeks, the jeweler and the man looked at all of the ring styles and discussed pricing based on the man's budget of $5,000. The man finally settled upon a square cut diamond with a prong setting that was priced at $5,500. The man initially offered the jeweler $4,500 for the ring. While the man and the jeweler were negotiating the price, the jeweler received a phone call regarding a family emergency. The jeweler told the man that he would email him an offer in the evening, and if they could "meet halfway," the jeweler would sell the ring to the man. The man agreed. That evening, both the jeweler and the man received emails from one another at the same time. The jeweler's email contained an offer to sell the ring for $5,000, and the man's email contained an offer to buy the ring for $5,000. Both emails (i) specified the same style of ring that the two parties had discussed earlier that day, (ii) required payment upon receipt of the ring in two weeks, and (iii) were signed with an electronic signature. Based upon their earlier discussions and the jeweler's email offer to sell the ring to him for $5,000, the man did not look for an engagement ring at any other jewelry store. When the man showed up two weeks later to pick up and pay for the ring, the jeweler denied that they had a binding contract and would not sell the ring. If the man sues the jeweler for breach of contract, will he likely succeed?

Yes, because both parties conveyed an intent to contract with one another through prior negotiations and the simultaneous emails.

A father hoping to build a new playground for his children had a friend whose hobby was woodworking. One day over lunch, the two men discussed an arrangement in which the woodworker would build and deliver a swing set to the father for $2,000 within two weeks. After lunch, the woodworker sent an email to the father restating what had been discussed. The father immediately responded in a signed email stating "We have a deal. But please deliver the set within one week instead." The woodworker did not respond but began working on the swing set that day. Eight days later, the father called the woodworker to ask why the swing set had not been delivered. The woodworker stated that he intended to deliver the swing set within the two-week period originally discussed. He began to work more quickly to complete the swing set sooner and delivered the swing set two days early, but the father refused to pay him for it. Under the UCC, is the woodworker entitled to recover the $2,000?

Yes, because he delivered the swing set within two weeks.

A library contacted a local artist expressing an interest in purchasing a particular one of the artist's sculptures for display at the library. The library's agent and the artist executed a written contract signed by both parties providing that the library would purchase the sculpture for $1,000 due upon delivery of the sculpture to the library. Just before they signed the contract, the agent told the artist, "Plan on delivering the sculpture in 10 days, but please remember that the library's obligation to purchase the sculpture will be conditioned on the approval of the chairperson of the Artistic Patronage Council, as they will be providing the library with the funds for this sale." The chairperson of the Artistic Patronage Council orally approved the sale the next day. However, ten days after the contract was executed, the artist decided he did not want to sell the sculpture. If the library sues the artist for breach of contract, is the library likely to prevail?

Yes, because the agreement was supported by good consideration even though it was conditioned on an uncertain event.

A wedding planner contracted with a local bakery to make cupcakes for an upcoming wedding reception. The bakery was very experienced in making cupcakes, and had a great reputation in the community. Although there were other comparably skilled cupcake makers in the area, the wedding planner eventually chose the bakery due to the price it quoted for the cupcakes. A few months before the wedding reception, the bakery's head baker unexpectedly had to take a leave of absence to deal with a medical issue. The bakery subsequently assigned the contract to a pastry chef in the same community. The pastry chef also had an excellent reputation in the community, and was at least equally as skilled in making cupcakes as the bakery. The bakery told the wedding planner about this assignment, and the wedding planner did not object. When the pastry chef fully performed on the contract and delivered the cupcakes, which conformed to the contract requirements, the wedding planner refused to accept or pay for the cupcakes. On these facts, has the wedding planner breached the contract?

Yes, because the assignment of the contract was permitted and the pastry chef properly and fully performed.

A boutique hotel contracted with a seamstress to hand make 500 pillows. The signed contract specified that the pillows should be filled with down, and that the pillow covers be made with white, 1000 thread count cotton fabric. Before the seamstress began making the pillows for the boutique hotel, she secured another commission for work that would prevent her from making the hotel's pillows. As a result, the seamstress informed the boutique hotel that she was passing on the hotel's contract to her former business partner, who was comparable in talent and skill at making high-quality pillows. The boutique hotel did not object to the substitution. The former partner diligently worked on making the pillows, using white, 1000 thread count fabric to make the pillow covers. However, instead of using down to fill the pillows, she used a comparably priced synthetic microfiber. The boutique hotel subsequently filed a breach of contract action against the seamstress. Will it succeed?

Yes, because the boutique hotel had not released the seamstress from liability under the contract.

A groom left his bride at the altar on the day of her wedding. The bride could not bear to keep any painful reminders of the occasion, so she offered to sell her wedding dress to one of her bridesmaids for $5,000. The bride stated that the offer would remain open for 30 days. The bridesmaid said she was interested but would have to think about it. A week later, the bridesmaid emailed the bride to ask if the price included a custom-made veil that the bride had worn. The bride did not respond to the bridesmaid's question. Within the 30-day period, the bridesmaid accepted the bride's initial offer of $5,000 for the wedding dress. In response, the bride stated that the bridesmaid could only buy the wedding dress for $6,000. Was a contract formed when the bridesmaid accepted the initial offer of $5,000?

Yes, because the bridesmaid's question did not constitute a counteroffer.

A farmer owned a tractor and offered his brother the chance to purchase it. He stated that his brother had to decide whether he wanted to purchase the tractor within "six months of today's date." The brother paid him $200 on that day to keep the option open. The agreement was reduced to writing, signed by both men, and dated May 15. The farmer died on July 1. On August 15, the brother notified the executor of the farmer's estate that he wanted to accept the offer to buy the tractor. The executor refused to sell, and the brother filed suit for the enforcement of the contract. Is the brother likely to prevail?

Yes, because the brother paid $200 to keep the option open.

On March 1, a company contracted with a singer for the singer to perform for the company picnic on May 1 for a fee of $10,000. On March 17, the singer informed the company that she signed a contract to film a movie. She suggested that the company hire another singer to take her place at the picnic. On April 1, the company hired the recommended replacement singer to perform at its picnic for $15,000. On April 25, the original singer informed the company that she has decided not to take the movie deal and will be available to perform on May 1. Even though the original singer arrived at the picnic on May 1 ready to sing, the company let the replacement singer perform. The company refused to pay $10,000 to the original singer. Is the company likely to prevail in a breach of contract claim against the original singer?

Yes, because the company hired the replacement singer as a substitute for the original singer before she retracted her repudiation.

An employee signed an employment contract with a company to be a remote salesman. The contract provided the employee's yearly salary and a requirement that he work at least 30 hours per week, but it did not provide any guarantees about how or when a potential bonus would be paid or earned. The contract also required the employee to log his monthly sales figures online by the last business day of the month. After the employee worked remotely for the company for a few months, the company called the employee on March 15. Over the phone, a representative of the company explained that the company was establishing a new bonus program for employees who reached certain monthly sales goals. The representative explained that in addition to logging sales online, the employee must call the company's central office on the first Friday of each month before the end of business hours and report his sales figures for the previous month in order to receive a bonus. The employee worked diligently for the remainder of March to meet the required sales figures in order to receive a bonus, working approximately 40 hours per week. He logged his sales online at the end of March, as required by his contract. On the first Friday in April, the employee called the company to report his March sales figures. However, the company had disconnected its phone lines and did not receive the employee's call. The company subsequently refused to pay the employee a bonus for his work in March. Will the employee likely prevail in a breach-of-contract action against the company for his unpaid March bonus?

Yes, because the company itself prevented the employee from satisfying the express condition of the March 15 offer.

A widow offered to sell her small business, together with all of the business's assets, to a non-profit organization. The organization accepted, and on June 1, they signed and executed a contract providing for the sale of the business for $25,000 at the end of the month. When the organization's agent signed the contract, she orally informed the widow that the organization's duty to purchase the business was conditioned on obtaining approval from a local zoning board to convert the business's primary office into an affordable healthcare clinic. At the end of the month, the widow refused to honor the contract because the organization neglected to request the necessary approval from the zoning board. The organization sued the widow for breach of contract. The organization presented clear evidence that they had the necessary funds to perform on the contract at the end of the month, and that the zoning board would have routinely approved the organization's plans for the office. Is the organization likely to prevail in its action against the widow?

Yes, because the condition of approval by the zoning board can and has been waived by the organization.

An owner of a nail salon started a new promotion to boost sales. The owner claimed that she would pay $100 to any customer who purchased a new type of long-lasting manicure from her nail salon over the next four months if the customer's manicure did not stay intact for an entire month. A customer purchased a manicure during the promotional period per the terms set forth by the owner, but the customer's manicure only stayed intact for three weeks. The customer tried to collect the $100 from the owner, but the owner refused to pay the customer. Can the customer collect the $100?

Yes, because the customer accepted the offer by purchasing the long-lasting manicure during the promotional period.

A manufacturer of t-shirts contracted with a new clothing store to sell the store 1,000 t-shirts per month for a period of two years. The clothing store's signature color for their clothing was an orange-tinted red color, called coquelicot, which is very difficult to replicate on a consistent basis. The contract specified that any t-shirts that were not coquelicot could be returned, but it was silent with regard to the return of any t-shirts for other reasons. One year into the contract, the store decided to switch to coquelicot-colored baseball hats instead of t-shirts. The store returned the most recent shipment of t-shirts to the manufacturer and demanded a refund. The manufacturer refused to grant the refund, and the store sued the manufacturer for damages. At trial, the manufacturer introduced the contract, which clearly stated that t-shirts that were not coquelicot could be returned. The store then attempted to introduce evidence that it had returned t-shirts for other reasons to the manufacturer in the past and received a refund. Is this evidence admissible?

Yes, because the evidence is relevant to show that the manufacturer had accepted the return of coquelicot-colored t-shirts in the past.

A painter entered into a contract with a homeowner to paint the exterior of the homeowner's home over a weekend while the homeowner was on vacation. After the homeowner left on his vacation, the painter was offered a second job that paid slightly more during the same weekend. The painter delegated his duty under the first contract to a second painter in exchange for a $50 advance and a promise to split his profits from both jobs with the second painter. The second painter took the advance and agreed to paint the homeowner's home that weekend. The first painter worked on the second job that weekend and did not check on the homeowner's home. When the homeowner returned from vacation, he discovered that his home had not been painted at all. In addition, no one has been able to locate the second painter. Does the homeowner have a cause of action against the first painter?

Yes, because the first painter was not released from his liability to the homeowner.

A general contractor learned that a company was accepting bids for a lucrative construction project involving a high-rise building. The general contractor contacted a number of subcontractors and informed them that he would be accepting bids for the electrical work on the project for the next week. After receiving a number of bids from subcontractors, the general contractor selected a bid from a young subcontractor, which was the lowest bid (although within a reasonable range of the other bids), and used that bid in calculating his overall bid on the construction project. Soon after submitting his bid to the general contractor but after the general contractor had submitted his overall bid, the subcontractor realized that he could have charged more for his services based on their market value. The company ended up choosing the general contractor's bid for the project. When the general contractor called the subcontractor to tell him that his bid was accepted and inform him of the starting date of the project, the subcontractor told the general contractor that he revoked his bid. As a result, the general contractor had to use a different subcontractor to perform the work at a cost $3,000 higher than the first subcontractor's bid. In a suit to recover the $3,000 from the subcontractor, is the general contractor likely to prevail?

Yes, because the general contractor detrimentally relied on the subcontractor's bid.

A sister convinced her brother that they should open a small coffee shop. Their friend, a guitarist, suggested bringing his band to play live music and attract customers. He did not request any payment, saying the publicity would be good for the band. The siblings agreed, and the band started playing at the shop weekly. The coffee shop became a success, in no small part due to the band's performances. When a businessperson offered to buy the coffee shop from the siblings, they orally agreed to each pay $10,000 out of their share of the sale proceeds to the guitarist for his help in making the shop popular. The sister told the guitarist about their agreement. He was so delighted with it that he put a down payment on a new car. By the time the sale of the business was finalized, the brother had encountered financial difficulties. After the sale, the siblings signed a written contract stating that the sister would pay the guitarist $10,000 and her brother would pay him $5,000. If, after the sale, the brother pays the guitarist only $5,000, will he have a valid basis for action against the brother for another $5,000?

Yes, because the guitarist's reliance on the promised payment prevented the siblings from changing the obligations of their oral contract.

A homeowner entered into a written agreement with a company to build a swimming pool in the homeowner's backyard for $40,000, to be paid upon completion of the pool. The company delegated its duty to an independent contractor. The independent contractor began the excavation for the pool, but after realizing that the costs would be higher than anticipated, it abandoned the project. The homeowner hired a partnership to complete the pool for $50,000. Can the homeowner sue the company for its expectation damages of $10,000?

Yes, because the independent contractor did not perform.

A nature magazine advertised a photography contest in its January issue, offering "$1,000 to any subscriber who sends us a photograph of the rare Florida Grasshopper Sparrow that we use for the cover of our May issue. Only submissions meeting our technical specifications and received by April 1 will be considered." The only subscriber to respond to the advertised contest sent the magazine a photograph of the sparrow that met the magazine's technical specifications. The photograph arrived on March 15. However, due to an ecological disaster that occurred in early April, the magazine used a different picture on the cover of its May issue. The magazine used the picture on the cover of its June issue, and has refused to pay $1,000 to the subscriber on the grounds that it was not used on the May cover. Is the subscriber likely to prevail in a breach of contract action against the nature magazine?

Yes, because the nature magazine prevented the publication of the photograph.

On November 1, the owner of a yacht posted a flier at a local coffee shop reading "Yacht for Sale: Make me an offer!" The flier also included the owner's phone number. A buyer called the owner on November 3 to ask how much the owner wanted for the yacht. The owner said, "Well, I'd hate to part with it for less than $55,000, but if you can pay me $50,000 by November 20, I suppose I'd sell it to you. I'll hold onto the yacht for you until then." Elated, the buyer took steps to obtain a loan by November 20. On November 15, a second buyer called the owner and offered to buy the yacht for $60,000. The owner immediately accepted, and the second buyer picked up the yacht the next day. On November 20, having obtained a loan, the first buyer visited the owner with a check for $50,000. The first buyer then learned the owner had already sold the yacht. Can the first buyer bring a successful suit against the owner for breach of contract?

Yes, because the owner's offer to the first buyer was still outstanding on November 20.

A law student attended law school on a full scholarship. At the end of the law student's second year, the law student lost her scholarship. In order to fund her third year, she borrowed $50,000 from her rich uncle. They executed a written agreement stating that the law student would repay the loan two years from May 15, the date of her law school graduation. On May 15, two years later, the law student did not pay her uncle back because she was unable to find a job as a lawyer. Instead, she was working as a server at a coffee shop. The uncle took no legal action. Four years later, the law student was still unable to pay the uncle back, but she did write him a letter, stating "I know I still owe you $50,000. I will repay you $50,000 if I get a law firm job." The statute of limitations for collecting debts in the jurisdiction is three years. Is the law student's promise contained in the letter to repay the loan enforceable?

Yes, because the promise was made after the statute of limitations had run.

The owner of a high-rise building entered into a written contract with a company to maintain and service the elevators in the building. The written contract contained the following provision: "This contract is the entire and final agreement of the parties regarding the maintenance and servicing of the elevators in Building. It supersedes any prior agreements, understandings, or negotiations." On the starting date of the contract, the company discovered that the elevators were significantly older than the owner had orally represented to the company during the negotiations prior to the signing of the contract. The company refused to maintain and service the building's elevators unless the owner agreed to a sizeable increase in the monthly payments called for in the contract. The owner refused and found another entity to maintain and service the elevators at a cost below what the company wanted, but above the original contract price. The owner then sued the company for breach of contract, seeking the difference between the contract price and the amount paid to the entity that was currently providing elevator maintenance and service. At trial, the company sought to introduce evidence of the owner's oral statement as to the age of the elevators during contract negotiations. Should the court permit the introduction of this statement?

Yes, because the statement relates to a contract defense.

A party-planning company specialized in creating and selling nine different kits for themed parties. A store that sells party related items entered into a written agreement with the company. Under this agreement, the company was to deliver 500 kits to the buyer by November 1. The agreement stated that selections regarding the type of kit and the number of each were to be made by October 15, but did not specify who was to make the selections. Neither the store nor the company selected any assortment of the kits by October 15. On October 16, the company notified the store that due to its breach, the company would not be shipping the party kits. At that time, the company had a surplus of all of their merchandise and could have filled the store's order with any combination of themed kits. On October 17, after receiving the company's notification, the store informed the company of its selections, but the company refused to send the kits that the store selected. If the store sues the company for breach of contract on November 1, is the store likely to prevail?

Yes, because the store's two-day delay in making its selection did not have a material effect on the company's ability to perform the contract.

A homeowner called a septic cleaning company and made arrangements for the company to remove the waste from the septic tank on the homeowner's property. After completing the job, the company mailed the homeowner a bill for $500, the fair market value of the services rendered by the company. The bill indicated that payment was due in 60 days. Upon receiving the bill, the homeowner called the company and informed it that, since he had lost his job due to an accident, he would not be paying the company's bill. The following day the company filed suit for breach of contract. Ten days later, the homeowner moved to dismiss the suit. The court granted the motion, dismissing the suit without prejudice. Is the court's dismissal proper?

Yes, because the vendor's complaint is premature.

A produce wholesaler sent a written offer to a farmer to purchase all of the corn produced by the farmer for a period of two years. Excited at the prospect of having a guaranteed sale for all of his corn, the farmer immediately communicated his acceptance to the wholesaler. The wholesaler and farmer entered into a written contract reflecting the basic terms set forth in the wholesaler's offer. Six months after the contract was executed, the wholesaler determined that, while the farmer's corn was returning a profit, the farmer's corn was not selling as well as corn that the wholesaler could acquire from other sources. Nevertheless, the wholesaler contacted the farmer and informed him that he would no longer purchase the farmer's corn and would be buying his corn from another source. If the farmer sues the wholesaler for breach of contract, is he likely to prevail?

Yes, because the wholesaler did not act in good faith.

A woman sent an offer to sell her office printer to her friend for $450. In her offer, the woman mentioned that an acceptance could be mailed to her business address, and that the friend should let her know within the next couple of weeks whether she was interested. The friend needed an office printer, so she immediately accepted the woman's offer by mailing a letter to the woman's home address. The woman only checked her mailbox at home once a week because she received so much junk mail, so she did not see the acceptance letter. Thinking that her friend was not interested, the woman sold her office printer to a different person. The next day, the friend came to the woman's house with a check for $450. The woman told the friend she had already sold the office printer. Will the friend succeed in an action for breach of contract?

Yes, because the woman did not specify that mailing an acceptance to her business address was the only mode of acceptance.

On October 1, a retail sporting equipment store telephoned a shoe manufacturer and offered to buy a minimum of 50 and a maximum of 100 pairs of running shoes at $40 a pair to be delivered in 60 days. The manufacturer accepted the offer orally and immediately faxed a signed letter to the store. The letter contained the following language: "This letter confirms our agreement by telephone on October 1 to sell you 50 pairs of running shoes for 60-day delivery." Sixty days later, the manufacturer delivered 100 pairs of conforming running shoes to the store. However, the store rejected all 100 pairs of shoes because it had found the same shoes from another seller for $30 a pair. Due to lack of demand, the manufacturer cannot resell the 100 shoes without suffering an economic loss. Can the manufacturer enforce a contract against the store?

Yes, for the sale of 50 pairs of shoes because the manufacturer's faxed letter stated that quantity term.