Details of this Paper

1. Which of the following words (or phrases) best...

Description

Solution


Question

1. Which of the following words (or phrases) best describes the act of accepting and giving legal force to an obligation that was previously NOT enforceable? a. Ratification b. Indemnification c. The duty to mitigate damages d. The statute of limitations 2. Which of the following is TRUE about Lucy v. Zehmer (the whisky and farm case)? a. The Lucy couple (i.e., the plaintiff) was awarded cash in the amount of $50,000 b. The case is often used as support for the subjective theory of contracts (e.g., the critical question is whether Zehmer was, in his own mind, honestly joking) c. Despite claiming he ?was high as a Georgia pine,? Zehmer attempted to testify in great detail as to what was said and what was done d. The terms of the alleged contract were NOT discussed before it was signed 3. Which of the following is TRUE about Baer v. Chase (the Sopranos case)? a. Baer (i.e., the plaintiff) failed to allege that he had provided legally sufficient consideration b. Baer alleged that Chase had never offered to pay Baer anything in return for Baer?s assistance c. Had the Court ruled in favor of Baer, it may have been difficult to determine the amount of damages to award Baer d. Baer would have prevailed had Chase agreed, IN WRITING, to ?take care of? Baer 4. Which of the following is TRUE? a. Most classified ads (e.g., ads for apartment rentals) are considered legal offers b. An offeror?s act of withdrawing an offer is known as revocation (and an offeror can generally revoke his/her offer as long as the revocation is communicated to the offeree before the offeree accepts) c. It is NOT possible for a ?handshake deal? to be legally binding d. All of the above 5. In Hamer v. Sidway, the Court determined that: a. The nephew had preexisting legal duty to provide the alleged consideration (e.g., by not gambling, the nephew was just obeying the law) b. The nephew gave legally sufficient consideration (for his uncle?s promise) by waiving his legal right to, among other things, drink and use tobacco c. The uncle did NOT receive sufficient consideration because the nephew actually benefited from the alleged consideration d. The consideration received by the uncle was worth as much as (or more than) the consideration provided by the uncle 6. Which of the following is MOST accurate about the holding in Blackmon v. Iverson (the case involving the basketball star and ?The Answer?)? a. Blackmon had a preexisting legal duty to share his ideas with Iverson b. Blackmon did not prevail because the alleged agreement was not in writing c. Because Blackmon?s idea was past consideration, it was not sufficient to support Iverson?s subsequent promise to pay Blackmon d. Blackmon could not contract with Iverson because Iverson was only a minor at the time of the matter in question 7. Which of the following is MOST likely required under the doctrine of promissory estoppel (also referred to as ?detrimental reliance?): a. Enforcement of the promise would be necessary to avoid an injustice b. Economic consideration given by the promisee to the promisor c. Mutual consideration that satisfies the basis of the bargain requirement d. Each of the above items is required under the doctrine of promissory estoppel 8. Which of the following is TRUE considering Yale Diagnostic Radiology v. Estate of Harun Fountain (the case involving the child who was shot in the head)? a. Contracts are never enforceable against minors b. When a medical service provider renders necessary services to an injured minor, a primary contract arises between the provider and that minor c. Minors can be liable for contracts ? even contracts that are implied in law (i.e., ?quasi contracts?) d. Both ?b? and ?c? are TRUE 9. Assume that you have, in good faith, performed substantially all of your obligations under a real estate contract that you previously entered into with Mr. X (to build Mr. X?s house). However, you have NOT performed exactly as you agreed to perform under the terms of the contract. Which of the following is TRUE considering Jacob & Youngs v. Kent (the case involving the Reading pipe)? a. You could not enforce the contract against Mr. X (because you did not perform exactly as you agreed to perform under the terms of the contract) b. If Mr. X brings a ?breach of contract? claim against you, it is possible that you would have to compensate Mr. X for his damages c. Any and all conditions under the contract would no longer be applicable d. All of the above 10. Which of the following is TRUE considering Vokes v. Arthur Murray, Inc. (the case involving the widow turned dance student)? a. Vokes (i.e., the widow) successfully proved that she had reasonably and justifiably relied on misrepresentations that were made to her b. Every person really has the potential to become an excellent dancer c. A party can never successfully challenge the enforceability of an alleged contract by alleging a tort, such as ?fraudulent misrepresentation? d. Statements by experts may be treated as statement of fact even though such statements might be considered opinions if made by others 11. Considering the ?unconscionable? cases Thibodeau v. Comcast Corp. and Jones v. Star Credit Corp., which of the following statements is TRUE? a. It is not possible for contracts to be considered procedurally unconscionable b. All contracts will be enforced unless fraud is proven c. Some contracts of adhesion are enforceable d. It is not possible for contracts to be considered substantively unconscionable 12. Which of the following is TRUE considering Feldman v. Google, Inc.? a. To increase the odds of being enforceable, an online contract should require the accepting party to take an affirmative action (e.g., the party should be required to click on a ?Yes, I agree to the above terms & conditions? button located immediately below a scrollable textbox containing the terms & conditions) b. No Court in the United States will enforce a forum selection clause c. To be enforceable, an online agreement must be written in 11 point font (or larger) d. All of the above 13. You are the manager and sole owner of ?B Inc.? (a high volume delivery service business). B Inc. uses a form contract with each of its clients. However, that form contract fails to even mention damages. Assume that B Inc. recently breached its contract with H. Under the terms of the contract, B Inc. promised to deliver a certain ?part? to H in one day. However, it actually took B Inc. four days to make the delivery to H. Because of B Inc.?s breach of contract (which B Inc. admits), H?s factory was shut down for three extra days (i.e., H?s factory could not run without the part). During those three days, H?s factory would have generated $100,000 of profit for H. Which of the following is TRUE? a. These facts illustrate that form contracts can never serve an important function b. B Inc. will automatically be liable to H for the $100,000 amount (because B Inc.?s contract failed to even mention damages) c. B Inc. will NOT be liable to H for the $100,000 amount (because B Inc.?s contract failed to state that B Inc. would be liable for such damages) d. Whether or not B Inc. will be liable to H for the $100,000 amount will depend on whether B Inc. had reason to know (or foresee) that such a loss would occur 14. Which of the following is TRUE about Crosswhite v. Jumpking, Inc. (the case involving the tragic back-flip attempt)? a. Several warnings were attached to the trampoline (and its components) b. The plaintiff was an adult (i.e., over 18 years of age) on the date of the injury and, for that reason, the warnings were deemed ?legally sufficient? c. In order to bring a lawsuit, the plaintiff first had to establish that he actually purchased (and still owned) the trampoline in question d. After the trial, the jury awarded the plaintiff with punitive damages 15. Which of the following is TRUE about Webster v. Blue Ship Tea Room, Inc. (the fish chowder case)? a. The judicial opinion in our text relied heavily on the doctrine of strict liability to resolve the case and to hold the defendant liable b. Had the case gone to a jury, the jury would have certainly found for the defendant c. Even though the chowder contained fish bones, it was ?merchantable? (i.e., the chowder was still fit to be eaten) d. All of the above 16. Why should Judges not be required (or even allowed) to evaluate the adequacy of consideration for every contract? a. Each party to a contract should be held responsible for the consequences of their own contractual promises b. This would result in juries being stripped of their powers c. Many Judges are not elected and thus do not have the public?s trust in making such decisions d. All of the above 17. During Chat, we used which item(s) to illustrate how an alleged contract might be contrary to public policy? a. An unreasonable covenant not to compete (i.e., an unreasonable noncomp) b. A customer agreement that mandated individual arbitration c. A contract of adhesion that unreasonably favored its drafter d. All of the above 18. When determining whether a contract is primarily for the sale of goods or the sale of services, Courts generally use: a. Expert testimony coupled with an advisory opinion from any applicable appellate Court b. The predominant-factor test c. The ?Subordinate Obligations? analysis provided by UCC 1-310 d. Established legal dictionaries such as ?Black?s Law Dictionary? 19. Who is MOST likely a ?merchant? under Article 2 of the UCC? a. A sporting goods retailer when selling shelving units the store no longer uses b. The owner of a Mexican restaurant when selling a chicken burrito c. The owner of a barber shop when selling a cash register d. All of the above 20. Which of the following is TRUE about contracts/sales under the UCC? a. Relative to the UCC, common law has lessened the requirement of definiteness of terms b. The UCC will generally govern sales of land c. The UCC does NOT always treat merchants and non-merchants equally d. All of the above 21. Which of the following warranties can be excluded or modified by a seller: a. An implied warranty of merchantability b. A warranty of good title c. An express warranty d. All of the above 22. Which of the following is MOST likely required to be in writing (or evidenced by a written memorandum or record) to be enforceable? a. A contract for the sale of a $250 television b. A contract for professional services to be completed within five months c. A contract for the sale of a $700 chair d. Each of the above contracts must be in writing to be enforceable 23. Which category of damages is MOST likely to be awarded in a case that involves only a breach of contract claim? a. Nominal damages b. Punitive damages c. Compensatory damages d. Each of the above categories of damages is typical in a breach of contract case 24. Which of the following is TRUE about ?covenants not to compete? (or ?noncompete agreements?) in employment contracts? a. To be enforceable, a noncompete agreement must be reasonable in its duration b. Noncompete agreements are NOT enforceable in any U.S. state c. The period of time (of restraint) can generally be any duration ? so long as the parties to the noncompete agreement are at least 18 years of age d. Each U.S. state will enforce a noncompete agreement in exactly the same manner (e.g., pursuant to the Uniform Noncompete Act of 1999) 25. Which of the following is TRUE? a. Identification typically takes place before specific goods are designated as the subject matter of a sales or lease contract b. Pursuant to the UCC, sellers must always deliver goods to a particular destination c. Title and risk of loss will generally pass to the buyer (from the seller) before the applicable goods are identified d. Under the UCC, risk of loss does not necessarily pass with title 26. Which of the following is FALSE? a. In the United States, the UCC will typically govern the sale of goods b. Some promises are NOT legally binding c. If one breaches a contract, it is NOT possible for him/her to be liable for more than the amount of the applicable contract d. Laws governing the sales of goods sometimes distinguish between ?merchants? and non-merchants 27. In a contract for the sale of a television, which of the following is LEAST likely to be successfully disclaimed? a. A title warranty b. The UCC?s good faith provision c. The implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose d. The implied warranty of merchantability 28. Considering Thibodeau v. Comcast Corp. and Jones v. Star Credit Corp., which of the following statements is FALSE? a. Some companies attempt to use contracts to reduce the risk of being sued b. The issue of unconscionability could arise in a ?class action? law suit c. Statutory law (such as the UCC) would never permit a Court to refuse to enforce a contract that was unconscionable at the time it was made d. Contracts do not always need to violate a statute in order to be unconscionable 29. During one of our Chat Sessions, we discussed the following quote, ?[c]oncededly, deciding [this case] is substantially easier than explaining it . . . ? Which of the following topics were we covering? a. Substantive unconscionability under the UCC b. The statute of limitations c. The requirement of legal consideration d. Whether minors can sign legally binding contracts 30. Paul leaves his Smart-phone with ?Ringo-Rings? to be repaired. Ringo-Rings regularly sells both new and used Smart-phones. Ringo-Rings then sells Paul?s Smart-phone to George, an ordinary customer who does NOT know that Ringo-Rings has no right to sell the Smart-phone. Which of the following statements is TRUE? a. The UCC provides no guidance for this type of scenario b. George will most likely get good title against Paul?s claim of ownership c. Paul will be entitled to get back his Smart-phone from George d. Whether or not George is a good faith buyer is irrelevant 31. Assume the same facts as in the prior question. However, for purposes of this question assume that Paul had stolen the Smart-phone from John (i.e., before Paul left the Smart-phone with Ringo-Rings to be repaired). Which of the following statements is TRUE? a. George will most likely get good title against Paul?s claim of ownership b. George will most likely get good title against John?s claim of ownership c. Paul will be entitled to get back the Smart-phone from George d. Each of the above statements is correct [* * * QUESTIONS 32 & 33 ARE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE * * *] BACKGROUND INFORMATION for QUESTIONS 32-33 ?Number 13 Steakhouse? is a famous restaurant located in Fort Lauderdale, FL. The owner of Number 13 Steakhouse also owns ?Dan?s Burgers & Brew? ? a famous restaurant located in Miami, FL. Number 13 Steakhouse recently engaged Air Ad to fly a sign above Miami and Fort Lauderdale. At 10 AM on Saturday, December 4, Air Ad?s pilot flew a sign above Miami and Fort Lauderdale that read: ?Run from Number 13 Steakhouse to Dan?s Brew & Burgers today and Number 13 Steakhouse pays $400.? On seeing the sign, Peyton goes to the front of Number 13 Steakhouse and then starts running towards Dan?s Brew & Burgers. About two hours later, when Peyton is more than halfway to Dan?s Brew & Burgers, Air Ad flew another sign over Miami and Fort Lauderdale that read: ?Number 13 Steakhouse Revokes.? About an hour after seeing the ?Number 13 Steakhouse Revokes? sign, Peyton completes his run in front of Dan?s Brew & Burgers. On seeing the ?Number 13 Steakhouse Revokes? sign, Brett goes to the front of Number 13 Steakhouse and then starts running towards Dan?s Brew & Burgers. Brett completes his run to Dan?s Brew & Burgers in about three hours. 32. Which of the following is MOST likely TRUE? a. A person could have accepted Number 13 Steakhouse?s offer by yelling ?I ACCEPT? at Air Ad?s pilot b. There is an enforceable contract between Number 13 Steakhouse and Brett c. There is an enforceable contract between Number 13 Steakhouse and Peyton d. All of the above 33. Which of the following is MOST likely TRUE? a. Number 13 Steakhouse?s attempted revocation will be effective against Peyton b. Number 13 Steakhouse?s attempted revocation will be effective against Brett c. Any contract that Number 13 Steakhouse did make with Brett and/or Peyton is a good example of a bilateral contract d. Because the UCC would govern this contract, it must be accepted in writing by Brett and/or Peyton

 

Paper#13970 | Written in 18-Jul-2015

Price : $25
SiteLock