Quizzes for exam 4

Sarah is 16 years old. She left home at age 15; her parents no longer support her. Sarah entered into a contract with Best Groceries for the purchase of $100 of groceries on credit. The groceries consisted of basic, necessary items. However, their reasonable value is only $80. If Sarah discovers that she has been overcharged and refuses to pay, Best is entitled to collect: None of the above $80 $100 $90 $50

$80

Rooftops vs. Cubs

- The outcome of the Cubs and rooftops was the contract. - Then, after the contract was agreed upon, the Cubs built a widescreen TV, enabling people to watch from the rooftops. - Rooftops sued - But the Cubs won because of the provision in the contract that said, "if governmental authorities approve expansion it will not violate the agreement." - the cubs won, they filed a motion to dismiss - the lawsuit was dismissed on a 12b6 - failure to state a claim.

Aaron promises to sell his boat to Matt, and Matt promises to buy it from Aaron. What type of contract is this? A unilateral contract A quasi-contract A bilateral contract A promissory estoppel contract An implied contract

A bilateral contract

Which of the following contracts is void? - A contract made by an unemancipated minor - A contract made by a person who has been adjudicated insane and institutionalized - A contract made by a person under the influence of mind-altering drugs - A contract made by a minor who receives no support from a parent or guardian - A contract made under duress

A contract made by a person who has been adjudicated insane and institutionalized

King sent Foster, a real estate developer, a signed offer to sell a specified parcel of land to Foster for $200,000. King, an engineer, had inherited the land. Foster telephoned King the same day that he received his letter and accepted the offer. Which of the following statements concerning the contract is correct under the statute of frauds? - No contract was formed because Foster did not sign the offer - No contract was formed because King is not a merchant - A contract was formed, although it would be enforceable only against King - A contract was formed but it is unenforceable - A contract was formed and it is enforceable against both parties

A contract was formed, although it would be enforceable only against King

Which of the following actions is considered to reflect a counteroffer? A grumbling acceptance A silent acceptance A demand for additional terms All four choices are correct An inquiry regarding terms

A demand for additional terms

Which of the following meets the requirements of consideration? - A promise not to engage in a crime or tort - A promise without a binding obligation - A promise that involves the exchange of a legal value - A promise to do a preexisting duty - A promise to give a gift

A promise that involves the exchange of a legal value

The settlement of an unliquidated debt is called a(n): Past consideration Bargained-for exchange Forbearance to sue Accord and satisfaction Moral obligation

Accord and satisfaction

When a promisee who has an existing claim agrees with the promisor that he will accept some performance different from that which was originally agreed on, both parties can use the remedy of: Specific performance Accord and satisfaction Waiver Rescission Injunction

Accord and satisfaction

Calvin tells Sara that he will sell her his car for $5,000. Sara agrees. The exchange is to take place in 10 days. The contract between Calvin and Sara is now: Bilateral, executory, and implied Bilateral, executed, and voidable Bilateral, executory, and express Unilateral, executed, and valid Unilateral, executory, and valid

Bilateral, executory, and express

Xena and Yoni have a contract, which obligated Xena to sell Yoni 100 boxes of screws for $100. Xena seeks to cancel the contract but instead the parties agree to orally modify the contract so that Xena will sell Yoni the same 100 boxes of screws for $75. The second agreement is: - Not binding because it isn't in writing - Not binding because it is an output contract - Binding by virtue of being mutually agreed upon - Binding because it is due to unforeseeable situation - Not binding due to the promise of performing a preexisting legal obligation

Binding by virtue of being mutually agreed upon

Austen Construction, a general contractor, advertised for bids from subcontractors on the electrical work for the renovation of one of State University's parking structures. The advertisement announced that the contract will be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. Bronte, a responsible electrical subcontractor, submitted the lowest bid to Austen for the electrical portion of the work. Austen informed Bronte that she should begin work immediately. Bronte then stated that she is "withdrawing" her bid from Austen. Which of the following statements is most accurate? - Austen should not rely on Bronte's offer to do the electrical work - Austen has accepted Bronte's offer, thereby forming a contract - Austen is not bound by Bronte's bid until he informs her of his intent to accept - Bronte has accepted Austen's offer by submitting the lowest bid - Bronte may withdraw her bid at any time prior to beginning work

Bronte has accepted Austen's offer by submitting the lowest bid

Morton Reeves, a building subcontractor, submitted a bid for construction of a portion of a high-rise office building. The bid contained material errors in computation. Lago Corp., the general contractor, accepted the bid with the knowledge of Reeves' errors. Reeves: - Must perform the contract unless he can show that Lago acted fraudulently - Must perform the contract according to the stated terms since his errors were unilateral - Can avoid liability on the contract only if his errors were not due to his negligence - Caused the contract to be void - Can avoid liability on the contract since Lago knew of his errors

Can avoid liability on the contract since Lago knew of his errors

Bing engaged Dill to perform personal services for $2,200 a month for a period of four months. The contract was entered into orally on July 1, 1984, and performance was to commence September 1, 1984. On August 10, Dill anticipatorily repudiated the contract. As a result, Bing: - May not assign his rights to damages under the contract to a third party - Can obtain specific performance - May not enforce the contract against Dill since the contract is oral - Can immediately sue for a breach of contract - Cannot withhold performance

Can immediately sue for a breach of contract

Which of the following is an exception to the consideration requirement? Gifts Nominal consideration Adequacy of consideration Charitable subscription Bargained-for exchange

Charitable subscription

Which form of damages is intended to give the victim of the breach of contract the "benefit of the bargain"? Compensatory Punitive Nominal Liquidated Waiver

Compensatory

The shipment of nonconforming goods, intended as an accommodation to the buyer, is a(n) _______________. Prompt shipment Counteroffer Inquiry regarding terms Stipulation Ambiguous offer

Counteroffer

A contract is said to be __________ - that is, the legal part can be separated from the illegal part—if the contract consists of several promises or acts by one party, each of which corresponds with an act or a promise by the other party. Implied-in-fact Divisible Unenforceable Implied-by-law Voidable

Divisible

In order for the consideration requirement in contracts to be met: - The consideration given by each party must be of roughly equal value - Each party must give consideration - The consideration must have monetary value - The consideration must consist of some form of property - The consideration must be illusory

Each party must give consideration

Which of the following characterizes the effect of incapacity caused by mental impairment? - A person formerly incapacitated by mental impairment cannot ratify a contract if he/she regains his capacity - If a court has found a person mentally incompetent after holding a hearing on his mental capacity and has appointed a guardian for him, the contract is considered voidable - The contracts of people who are suffering from a mental defect at the time of contracting are usually considered to be void - A person disaffirming on the ground of mental impairment need not return any consideration given by the other party - If a contract is found to be voidable on the ground of mental impairment, the person who lacked capacity at the time the contract was made has the right to disaffirm the contract

If a contract is found to be voidable on the ground of mental impairment, the person who lacked capacity at the time the contract was made has the right to disaffirm the contract

When the consideration given in exchange for the collateral promise is something the guarantor seeks primarily for his own benefit rather than for the benefit of the primary debtor, the contract: Is the opposite of an original contract Is considered void Is outside the statute of frauds Needs to be in writing Must be proven by parol evidence

Is outside the statute of frauds

Daniel owes Casey a debt, the amount of which is subject to a good faith dispute. The parties agree to settle the debt, with Daniel promising to pay Casey $15,000 and Casey promising to release Daniel on a $25,000 debt. The settlement agreement: - Lacks consideration because Casey is not giving Daniel any legal value - Lacks consideration because it is past consideration - Is supported by consideration - Lacks consideration because Daniel is promising to perform a preexisting legal obligation - Is binding even though there is no consideration

Is supported by consideration

Why is past consideration not a consideration in a present promise? It falls under exceptions to consideration It does not pertain to the present exchange It is not covered under the UCC codes for consideration It involves an issue of moral obligation It involves a modification

It does not pertain to the present exchange

What is the legal status of an improperly dispatched acceptance that was sent by a means of communication that was nonauthorized by the offeror (traditional common law)? It leads to an immediate revocation It is effective when received It is valid but unenforceable It is effective upon dispatch It is a stipulation

It is effective when received

A bilateral contract is "taken out of the statute of frauds" when: It cannot be completed within a year from the day of its existence It is fully performed by at least one party It is put in writing It has strict rules of performance It is proven by the parol evidence rule

It is fully performed by at least one party

Payne entered into a written agreement to sell a parcel of land to Stevens. At the time the agreement was executed, Payne had consumed alcoholic beverages. Payne's ability to understand the nature and terms of the contract was not impaired. Stevens did not believe that Payne was intoxicated. The contract is: Illegal Void as a matter of law Legally binding on both parties Voidable at Stevens' option Voidable at Payne's option

Legally binding on both parties

Damages that are agreed upon at the time the contract is entered into are called _____. Compensatory damages Consequential damages Liquidated damages Mitigation of damages Bargain damages

Liquidated damages

Barney is 16 years old. His aunt had promised in writing to pay him $1,000 if Barney would refrain from drinking alcohol for one year. Barney refrained from drinking alcohol for one year. However, his aunt now refuses to pay Barney as agreed-upon. The aunt claims that because Barney suffered no detriment by refraining from alcohol, his non-drinking does not constitute legal consideration and therefore no contract was formed. If Barney sues his uncle, Barney will:

Lose, Lacks legal value, no consideration b/c no right to drink alcohol

On May 1, Dix and Wilk entered into an oral agreement by which Dix agreed to purchase a small parcel of land from Wilk for $450. Dix paid Wilk $100 as a deposit. The following day, Wilk received another offer to purchase the land for $650, the fair market value. Wilk immediately notified Dix that Wilk would not sell the land for $450. If Dix sues Wilk for specific performance, Dix will: - Prevail, because there was part performance. - Prevail, because of promissory estoppel - Lose, because the agreement was not in writing and signed by Wilk - Prevail, because the amount of the contract was less than $500 - Lose, because the fair market value of the land is over $500

Lose, because the agreement was not in writing and signed by Wilk

A bilateral contract is accepted by when the offeree: - Performs the requested act - Makes the promise requested by the offer - Accepts the offer in silence without prior indication - Makes additional inquiries regarding the terms - Makes a counteroffer

Makes the promise requested by the offer

On May 1, 1985, Mint, a 16-year-old, purchased a sailboat from Sly Boats. Mint used the boat for six months, at which time he advertised it for sale. Which of the following statements is correct? - The sale of the boat to Mint was void, thereby requiring Mint to return the boat and Sly to return the money received - Sly Boats has the power to recover the boat from Mint because he has advertised it for sale - Mint's use of the boat for six months after the sale on May 1 constituted a ratification of that contract - Mint may disaffirm the May 1 contract at any time prior to reaching majority - The contract is illegal

Mint may disaffirm the May 1 contract at any time prior to reaching majority

Guy and Boyd make an oral contract whereby Guy agrees to sell Boyd, 480 widgets (goods) at a price of $480. Later, the parties want to modify the contract so that the price would become $520. This modification: Must be in writing Must be oral because the first contract was oral Can be oral but need not be Is unenforceable because the first contract is unenforceable Is an unenforceable modification

Must be in writing

The general common law rule on contract modifications holds that an agreement to modify an existing contract requires: - New and independent consideration - An economic exchange of substantial value - A writing (always) - Inclusion of a new party to the contract - A necessary increase in the value of the exchange

New and independent consideration

Can a local businessman pay a police officer $50 a week to watch the business more closely? - Yes, as long as the contract is registered with the Secretary of State - No, Public Officials cannot give consideration on duties they are already supposed to perform - Yes, as long as $50 is reasonable amount to watch the business - Yes, as long as a court reviews the contract within 30 days - No, unless a court approves the agreement

No, Public Officials cannot give consideration on duties they are already supposed to perform

Milner Developers proposed an offer to Henry Wright, an independent contractor, offering to hire him for their next project. They offered him a certain rate and specified the contract details along with describing the stipulated mode of acceptance but received no response. Wright responded to the offer after a delay of two months with a quote for a higher amount than that mentioned by Milner Developers. Do the two parties have a binding contract? - Yes, because Wright's silent signaled his acceptance of the offer - Yes, because they agreed on the material terms - No, because the offer made by Milner Developers was ambiguous - No, because Wright's letter was a counteroffer to the original offer - Yes, because Milner Developers did receive a response from Wright

No, because Wright's letter was a counteroffer to the original offer

Sue offers to buy a house from John and they were negotiating the price of the house. In the meantime, Sue confides in John's girlfriend that she is willing to pay an amount of $50,000 for the house. Delighted to hear this, John's girlfriend tells him the good news. John immediately calls up Sue and accepts her offer. Is there a binding contract? - Yes, because there is valid consideration - Yes, because a third party has communicated the terms of Sue's offer to John and that John had accepted the same - No, because the offeror had not communicated the terms of the offer to the offeree - No, because the contract is still not signed by both the parties Yes, because of the doctrine of implied contract - Yes, because of the doctrine of implied contract

No, because the offeror had not communicated the terms of the offer to the offeree

Sara tells Kate that she will give her $50 to clean her garage. When Kate is halfway done, Sara decides to revoke her offer. Is this a valid revocation? Yes, because Sara is the master of the offer here Yes, because Sara can revoke the offer any time she feels like No, because this is a valid contract that cannot be revoked Yes, because you can't force someone to do something they don't want to do No, because this is now a bilateral contract

No, because this is now a bilateral contract

Helen worked for ABC Motors for 25 years. The president of ABC said to her: "In consideration of your past service for 25 years, I promise to give you a new car next week." However, he did not give the car. Is this promise legally enforceable? Yes, a contract was formed Yes, promissory estoppel requires enforcement of the promise No, legal consideration is absent No, legal capacity is absent Yes, quasi-contract requires enforcement of this promise

No, legal consideration is absent

Whose signatures are needed in order to satisfy the statute of frauds? - Only the signatures of witnesses to the agreement are required - Only the signature of the party, attempting to enforce the contract, is required - Only the signature of the party against whom enforcement is being sought - Only the signature of the third party to the contract, the beneficiary, is required - All parties to the contract

Only the signature of the party against whom enforcement is being sought

A minor entered into a contract with GAM & Co. On attaining majority, he wishes to enforce the contract. The adult party must: Perform the contract Rescind the contract Abandon the contract Ratify the contract Void the contract

Perform the contract

Which of the following is true of a revocation? - The power of revocation of an offer lies with the offeree - Death or insanity cannot be reasons for revocation - Promissory estoppels are used to prevent revocations - Offers that fail to state a specified time period are considered invalid - Revocations are never valid

Promissory estoppels are used to prevent revocations

April and Brian entered into a partially integrated written contract. Before the written contract was completed, April made an oral statement to Brian regarding the terms of the contract. This statement was not contained in the written contract. Under the parol evidence rule, evidence of April's oral statement would be admissible if it were used to: - Create a completely new agreement - Introduce an ambiguous term in the written contract - Prove an additional term consistent with the written agreement - Change the terms of the written contract - None of the above

Prove an additional term consistent with the written agreement

A written agreement was signed by two parties and it was intended to be their entire agreement. The parol evidence rule will prevent the admission of evidence that is offered to: - Prove the existence of a contemporaneous oral agreement that modifies the contract - Establish that fraud had been committed in the formation of the contract - Establish that there was a mistake of fact in the formation of the contract - Prove the existence of a subsequent oral agreement that modifies the contract - Explain the meaning of an ambiguity in the written contract

Prove the existence of a contemporaneous oral agreement that modifies the contract

A memorandum on the sale of goods that does not indicate the _________ of goods to be sold will not satisfy the UCC's writing requirement. Quality Quantity Delivery Cost None of the above

Quantity

Which of the following ends the right to rescind a voidable contract? Acquiescence Rescission Concealment Assertion Ratification

Ratification

The "confirmatory memorandum" exception to the UCC's statute of frauds provision: - Requires that the memorandum be signed by the party to be bound - Requires that the memorandum be sent within ten days after the contract is made - Applies even though the memorandum does not satisfy the UCC's writing requirement - Requires that both parties to the contract be merchants - None of the above

Requires that both parties to the contract be merchants

Where the parties to a contract wish to cancel their contract and be in the same position as they were prior to forming the contract, they should seek to obtain a(n) ___________. Novation Accord and satisfaction Revocation Rescission Specific performance

Rescission

The legal remedy of __________ requires the defendant to pay the value of the benefits that the plaintiff has conferred on him. Restitution Waiver Compensatory damages Accord and satisfaction Punitive damages

Restitution

Price signed a contract to sell Wyatt a parcel of land for $90,000. The entire sales price was payable at the closing. Price has decided to keep the land. If Wyatt commences an action against Price, what relief is Wyatt most likely to receive? - Compensatory damages - Specific performance - Rescission - Compensatory damages and punitive damages

Specific performance

Nina has breached a contract between Milo and her, but not materially. This means that Milo can: - Sue only for damages caused by the breach - Sue for damages for a total breach of the contract - Cancel the contract - Withhold his performance, even if the breach is remedied - Recover punitive damages

Sue only for damages caused by the breach

According to the Code, when there is an acceptance that contains terms that are different from the original terms of the contract, the contract will consist of _______________ and the appropriate gap-filling presumptions of the Code. An inquiry regarding terms Notifications to prevent breach of conduct Counteroffers from either party Terms on which the parties' writings agree Standardized form terms

Terms on which the parties' writings agree

Mr. White enters into a contract to sell a car to Joe Jr. who is 15 years old and is considered a minor in the state where he lives. What is the status of the contract that Mr. White and Joe Jr. entered into? - If the contract is registered with the Secretary of State's office it will become enforceable - The contract is void and unenforceable - The contract is only valid if its in writing - The contract is enforceable and valid - The contract is voidable and is enforceable unless and until Joe Jr. cancels it

The contract is voidable and is enforceable unless and until Joe Jr. cancels it

Three days before she was judicially declared mentally incompetent and institutionalized, Irma bought a $50,000 automobile by cash and took delivery of it. Which of the following is true about this contract? - It is voidable at the discretion of the seller - The contract is voidable due to Irma's institutionalization - The contract cannot be disaffirmed because it is fully executed - Irma ratified the contract by paying the price of the car - The contract is void

The contract is voidable due to Irma's institutionalization

James goes to a dentist to have a tooth extracted. James never signs a written contract for this service, and he and the dentist never made an oral agreement either. Later, the dentist bills James who refuses to pay. The dentist sues James. Which of the following is true? - The dentist cannot recover because there was no express contract here - The dentist can recover under the doctrine of promissory estoppel - It depends on the application of Article of the UCC - The dentist can recover under the preexisting duty theory - The dentist can recover under quasi-contract

The dentist can recover under quasi-contract

Which of the following is true of necessaries? - The liability for necessaries is based on promissory estoppel - The liability for necessaries is quasi-contractual - A minor is liable for the necessaries that he/she did not receive - In case of a disaffirmance, the minor need not pay for any necessary - An item is considered a necessary even if the minor already possesses it

The liability for necessaries is quasi-contractual

In deciding whether consideration necessary to form a contract exists, a court must determine whether: - The consideration given by each party is of roughly equal value - The consideration conforms to the subjective intent of the parties - The consideration has sufficient monetary value - There is mutuality of consideration

There is mutuality of consideration

Mr. Yellow delivers a stack of newspapers to Mr. Green's store to see if he wants them. A note attached indicates the stack of papers is $50. Mr. Green without communicating an acceptance sold the entire stack of papers to his customers. What is the status of the agreement between Mr. Yellow and Mr. Green? - There is no contract because Mr. Green did not expressly accept the offer - There is a contract because Mr. Green accepted by implied action - There is no contract because the goods are treated as gifts to Mr. Green - There is no contract because the Secretary of State was not notified - There is no contract because silence cannot constitute acceptance

There is no contract because Mr. Green accepted by implied action

Mr. White contracts with his wife Ms. White to watch their kids, Joe and Jimmy, for $50 for night. What is the status of the contract between Mr. Smith and Ms. White? - There is no contract because Ms. White gave inadequate consideration - There is a contract as long as Mr. White registers the contract with the Secretary of State - There is a contract as long as $50 is a reasonable profit for watching the kids - There is a contract as long as a court reviews the terms within 30 days - It depends on how well-behaved the kids are

There is no contract because Ms. White gave inadequate consideration

Kyle sent Tara a letter offering to sell Tara his car. Tara left the letter on her desk, where her roommate, Maggie, saw it. After reading the letter, Maggie wrote to Kyle and stated that she (Maggie) wanted to accept Kyle's offer. Which of the following is true? - Kyle must sell Maggie his car unless Kyle is a merchant under the UCC - There is no contract between Kyle and Maggie because Kyle did not communicate the offer to Maggie - Kyle and Tara have a contract for the purchase of Kyle's car - Maggie's letter is a valid acceptance of Kyle's offer - None of the above

There is no contract between Kyle and Maggie because Kyle did not communicate the offer to Maggie

Tracy, aged 12, is named the sole inheritor of her family mansion, which is valued to be worth millions. She has disaffirmed the agreement on the advice of her uncle and guardian Pete. This automatically transfers the title to the latter. Which of the following statements is true of the case? - Tracy cannot disaffirm until she has reached majority - Tracy's decision will be allowed by the family courts - Pete has every right to Tracy's property and can take legal possession of it - Tracy's decision is valid as long as it is in writing - It depends on the value of the real estate

Tracy cannot disaffirm until she has reached majority

Normally, an illegal contract is: A quasi-contract Implied-in-fact Unenforceable Voidable Ratified

Unenforceable & void

An otherwise valid contract whose enforcement is barred by the applicable contract statute of limitations is an example of a(n): Bilateral contract Voidable contract Quasi-contract Unenforceable contract Void contract

Unenforceable contract

Which of the following contracts are agreements that create no legal obligations and for which no remedy is given? Valid contracts Unenforceable contracts Void contracts Voidable contracts Quasi-contracts

Void contracts

When do traditional contract (common law) rules apply to a contract for the sale of goods? - Always - It depends if the seller is a merchant - Never - Courts can choose to apply the UCC Article 2 or traditional contract (common law) rules at their discretion - Where no specific UCC Article 2 rule exists

Where no specific UCC Article 2 rule exists

Barney is 23 years old. His aunt had promised in writing to pay him $1,000 if Barney would refrain from drinking alcohol for one year. Barney refrained from drinking alcohol for one year. However, his aunt now refuses to pay Barney as agreed-upon. The aunt claims that because Barney suffered no detriment by refraining from alcohol, his non-drinking does not constitute legal consideration and therefore no contract was formed. If Barney sues his uncle, Barney will: - Lose because consideration must have monetary value - Lose because his aunt just had his best interests in mind and was trying to help him make good choices - Win because no consideration is needed in this contract - Win because Barney had a legal right to drink alcohol - Lose because refraining from an action can never be considered legal consideration

Win because Barney had a legal right to drink alcohol

Betty, age 16, buys a car and wrecks it one week later. She takes it back to the seller and demands all her money back. According to the traditional rule, is she entitled to get all her money back? - Yes, regardless of the condition of the car, because this was a void contract - Yes, regardless of the condition of the car, because this was a voidable contract - No, she is entitled to no remedy in this situation - No, she is entitled to get some money back but less the value of the damage to the car - It depends if the car can be fixed

Yes, regardless of the condition of the car, because this was a voidable contract

Jonas contracts with Lucy to paint Lucy's house. Jonas paints Sarah's house by mistake, thinking it belongs to Lucy. Sarah is on vacation and does not know Jonas is painting her house. Sarah comes home from vacation and discovers her house has been painted. Sarah's house looks much better than it did before the paint job. Jonas' work has greatly improved the value of Sarah's house. Jonas sends a bill to Sarah and she refuses to pay. Jonas sues Sarah. Who most likely wins? Why? a)Sarah because she did not hire Jonas to paint her house and she did not know he was painting her house until the job was finished b)Jonas because of the doctrine of Quasi-Contract; Jonas conferred a benefit on Sarah and she retained the benefit c)Jonas will win but Sarah can get indemnified by Lucy d)Jonas because of the doctrine of Promissory Estoppel e)Jonas but only because his work has greatly improved the value of Sarah's house creating an Implied Contract

a)Sarah because she did not hire Jonas to paint her house and she did not know he was painting her house until the job was finished

Justine, a self-employed 16-year-old whose parents are dead, buys a dress on credit for $70. After receiving the dress and discovering that its reasonable value is only $50, Justine tries to disaffirm the deal before paying the $70. In this case: a)Justine can disaffirm, and she is bound to pay the full $70 b)Justine can disaffirm, but she is only bound to pay $50 c)Justine can disaffirm, and she can return the dress without paying for it d)Justine has to return the dress e)Justine cannot disaffirm

b)Justine can disaffirm, but she is only bound to pay $50

On Thursday, Trista Dylan receives a letter from Charlie Holmes offering to sell her a diamond ring and stating that: "if you choose to accept, you must do so prior to 2:00 p.m. tomorrow." Trista had a telegram of acceptance dispatched well before 2:00 p.m. on Friday but it is delivered to Charlie's home only at 2:15 p.m. Do Trista and Charlie have a binding contract? (apply modern contract law rule) a)No, because Trista's purported acceptance was received after 2:00 p.m. b)Yes, because Trista dispatched telegram prior to 2:00 p.m. c)No, because Trista's use of a telegram was not stipulated in the offer d)Yes, unless Charlie is not home to receive the telegram e)No, because a diamond ring is "goods"

b)Yes, because Trista dispatched telegram prior to 2:00 p.m.

Martin Nowak, an accountant, entered into a written contract with Jane Gibson to perform certain tax services for Jane. Shortly thereafter, Jane was assessed additional taxes and she wanted to appeal the assessment. Jane was required to appeal immediately and the workpapers held by Martin were necessary to appeal. Martin refused to furnish Jane with the workpapers unless he was paid a substantially higher fee than was set forth in the contract. Jane reluctantly agreed in order to meet the filing deadline. The contract as revised is: a)voidable at Jane's option based on undue influence b)voidable at Jane's option based on duress c)void on the ground of undue influence d)void on the ground of duress

b)voidable at Jane's option based on duress

Keisha agreed to sell Susan her Picasso painting. She wrote the name of the painting and $600 on a napkin. Both Keisha & Susan signed the napkin. Susan paid Keisha the money and Keisha: a.May refuse to hand over the painting since contract was on a napkin and is unenforceable b.Must give Susan the painting since the contract satisfies the statute of frauds

b.Must give Susan the painting since the contract satisfies the statute of frauds

If Pool Liner Manufacturing Company makes an offer in a signed writing in which it proposes to sell 100 of its SunRay Pool Liners to AquaSystems Pro for $200,000 and gives assurances that the offer will be kept open for six months, the offer is: a)A firm offer that cannot be revoked for six months b)A revocable offer c)A firm offer that cannot be revoked for three months d)An option e)An offer for a unilateral contract

c)A firm offer that cannot be revoked for three months

Able borrowed $10,000 from Baker, promising to return it with $1,000 interest on January 1, 2006. There is no dispute that Able owes Baker $11,000 due on January 1, 2006. On that day, Able gave Baker a valid check in the amount of $10,500 marked "payment in full for loan due January 1, 2006." Baker accepted that check and deposited it into his account. If Baker then sues Able for the unpaid $500, what would the result be? a)Able wins, because Baker accepted the lesser payment b)Able wins, because Baker made an implied promise to accept $10,500 as full payment, thereby forgiving $500 of the loan c)Baker wins, because Able gave no consideration in exchange for Baker's promise to forgive $500 of the loan d)Baker wins, because marking "payment in full" can never relieve a party of its original obligations under a contract

c)Baker wins, because Able gave no consideration in exchange for Baker's promise to forgive $500 of the loan

Lucy wants to replace all of the major appliances in her home. She entered into a contract with Appliances Are Us for the purchase and installation of the appliances. The price of the appliances was $10,000 and the cost of the labor to install the appliances was $1,000. Later, Lucy became dissatisfied with this transaction and now wants to sue Appliances Are Us. Lucy wants to apply the contract rules of the UCC, but Appliances Are Us wants to apply the contract rules of the common law. Which source of law will LIKELY govern this case? a)The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the contract included the sale of goods b)The contract rules of the common law will apply because Appliances Are Us is a merchant c)The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the predominant purpose of the contract was sale of goods d)The contract rules of the common law apply, because the contract included services, which are governed by the common law e)The contract rules of the common law apply, because all contracts are governed by the common law

c)The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the predominant purpose of the contract was sale of goods

April Roberts ordered one hundred 19-inch color television sets from Carl Soans and requested for a prompt shipment of the goods. Carl promptly shipped fifty 21-inch color television sets and fifty 19-inch color television sets without informing April that the shipment of nonconforming television sets was an accommodation. Which of the following is true? a)There is no acceptance because Carl's shipment materially differed from the terms of the offer b)There is an acceptance and April is bound to pay the reasonable value of the fifty 21-inch television sets she did not ask for c)There is an acceptance but Carl has breached the contract by shipping nonconforming television sets d)There is a new offer that Carl has made by sending the nonconforming goods which April can accept or reject

c)There is an acceptance but Carl has breached the contract by shipping nonconforming television sets

Sam, a plumber, entered into a contract for $75,000 with Orr to perform certain plumbing services in Orr's building. After Sam had satisfactorily performed the work, Orr discovered Sam had violated a state licensing statute. As a result, Orr denied paying any money to Sam. The licensing statute was enacted merely to raise revenue for the state. An independent appraisal of Sam's work indicated that the building's fair market value increased by $70,000 as a result of Sam's work. The cost of the materials which Sam supplied was $35,000. If Sam sues Orr, Sam will be entitled to recover: a)Nothing b)$35,000 c)$70,000 d)$75,000

d) $75,000

Martin owns Great Expectations, a trendy Manhattan restaurant. He enters into a contract with Mary, who makes and sells pastries. The contract states that Mary will "supply all of Great Expectation's needs" for pastries for the next year. Enforceable? a)Yes, but only if Martin buys all of the pastries produced by Mary in the next year b)No, because the promise fails to specify the quantity of goods to be purchased c)No, because Martin might not need any pastries in the next year d)Yes, because this is a requirements contract

d)Yes, because this is a requirements contract

Chica, a women's clothing store, held a "prize drawing" for a $500 shopping spree on Saturday that it had advertised throughout the week. Participation in the drawing required being at the store by noon and completing an application form that included personal information and placing it in a box. The information would then be put into a database for marketing purposes. Fashion consultants offering merchandise for sale greeted customers arriving at the store on Saturday morning. Joy happened to be walking by the store and popped in just before noon. She filled out the application and placed it is the box. Joy was the winner of the drawing. Has she given consideration for the prize? a)No, she gave no legal value to Chica, she happened to be walking by b)No, unless she purchased an item from one of the consultants c)Yes, but only if she saw the advertisements d)Yes, she came to the store and gave information that was for the store's use

d)Yes, she came to the store and gave information that was for the store's use

Smith and Benson make an oral contract for the sale of some land at a price of $500,000. After paying Smith $400,000 of the purchase price, Benson takes possession of the land. One month later, Smith wants to boot Benson off the land. His argument is that the parties' oral agreement is unenforceable under the statute of frauds. Which of the following is the MOST correct? a.Smith is correct, because contract is for amount greater than $500 b.Smith is correct, because it is an oral contract for sale of real estate c.Smith is incorrect, because contract is for indefinite period of time d.Smith is incorrect, because Benson paid part of the purchase price and took possession

d.Smith is incorrect, because Benson paid part of the purchase price and took possession

Carla lost her iPhone in Hodge Hall. Jonas found Carla's phone while walking to class and returned it to her. The next day, after returning the phone, Jonas saw a flier hanging in Hodge Hall (that Carla made), which offered $50 for the return of Carla's phone. Jonas demands payment from Carla for the return of her phone. Carla refuses. Jonas sues Carla for breach of contract. Who is MOST likely to win and why? a)Jonas wins because it would be against public policy to discourage people from returning lost items b)Carla wins because a flier offering a reward for the return of an item is not specific enough to be a valid offer c)Jonas wins because he and Carla had a valid bilateral contract d)Jonas wins because this is a unilateral contract in which Jonas accepted Carla's offer with his return of the phone e)Carla wins because Jonas didn't know about the reward until after returning the phone

e)Carla wins because Jonas didn't know about the reward until after returning the phone

When the surrounding facts and circumstances indicate that an agreement has in fact been reached, a(n) _____ has been created. Implied contract Quasi-contract Void contract Unenforceable contract Voidable contract

implied contract

Todd is a licensed real estate broker in Ohio. One of Todd's largest clients, Sun Corp., contracted in writing with Todd to find a purchaser for its plant in New York and agreed to pay him a 6% commission if he was successful. Todd located a buyer who purchased the plant. Unknown to Todd, New York has a real estate broker's licensing statute, which is regulatory in nature, intended to protect the public against unqualified persons. Todd violated the licensing statute by failing to obtain a New York license. If Sun refuses to pay Todd any commission and Todd brings an action against Sun, he will be entitled to recover: Nothing Out of pocket expenses only The commission agreed upon A fee based on the actual hours spent A reasonable fee

nothing

Contracts in which one party to the agreement agrees to buy all of the other party's production of a particular commodity is called a(n): Requirements contract Composition agreement Output contract Nominal consideration Exclusive dealing contract

output contract

Which of the following allows a party who has materially breached a contract to recover the reasonable value of any benefits he has conferred on the promise? Quasi-contract Anticipatory repudiation Specific performance Accord and satisfaction Promissory estoppel

quasi-contract

Reggie went to the Napa Valley Harvest Festival, when he stopped at Tracy's booth where she was selling paintings of vineyards. Reggie admired a painting of vineyards, which did not appear to be for sale. Reggie said to Tracy, "I will give you $200 if you give me that painting right now." Tracy said nothing in response, but she gave Reggie the painting, and Reggie gave her $200 in cash. This is an example of a contract that is now: bilateral and executed bilateral and executory unilateral and executed unilateral and executory None of the above

unilateral and executed

A contract in which one or more of the parties have the legal right to cancel their obligations under the contract is called a(n): Void contract Valid contract Voidable contract Unenforceable contract Quasi-contract

voidable contract