A) 1555
B) 1677
C) 1770
D) 1776
E) 1865
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Todd will be required to pay the interest amounts because the agreement involving performing services in lieu of paying interest was not in writing.
B) Todd will be required to pay the interest amounts because the parol evidence rule bars evidence of any oral agreement outside the written agreement.
C) Assuming the court credits Todd's account of events, Todd will not be required to pay the interest amounts because the oral agreement will be considered a separate enforceable agreement.
D) Assuming the court credits Todd's account of events, Todd will not be required to pay the interest amounts because the oral agreement will be considered an extension and part of the original written agreement.
E) Assuming the court credits Todd's account of events, based on the parol evidence rule, Todd will be required to pay only 1/2 of the interest amounts.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Hearsay
B) Oral
C) Irrelevant
D) Immaterial
E) Inconclusive
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) ABC Co. will win because even if a three-year oral agreement for employment was made, it would not have been enforceable because the statute of frauds requires that agreements that cannot be completed within one year be in writing. Further, the draft Sam returned was not signed by ABC Co.
B) ABC Co. will win because although the three-year oral agreement for employment was initially enforceable, Sam reopened negotiations by altering the later contract to provide that he was to receive three weeks of vacation.
C) ABC Co. will win because as a matter of law, no other document can alter the provisions of an employee handbook.
D) A jury will decide if Brandy orally agreed to a three-year contract; and, if so, Sam gets his job back along with the extra weeks of vacation.
E) As a matter of law, since the contract was sent to Sam, he received a guarantee of employment for three years; but he does not get the extra weeks of vacation he inserted.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Harry is correct.
B) Harry is incorrect because he is the one being sued, and he signed the document.
C) Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the selling price was referenced.
D) Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the type of subject matter involved was referenced.
E) Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the parties were clearly identified.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The court ruled that the agreement did not involve an interest in land and did not come within the statute of frauds.
B) The court ruled that the agreement did involve an interest in land and, therefore came within the statute of frauds.
C) The court ruled that the agreement did not involve an interest in land but placed it within the statute of frauds in order to prevent injustice.
D) The court ruled that the agreement fell within the statute of frauds but that an oral agreement was sufficient.
E) The court ruled that the agreement to deposit debris and soil on land did not fall within the statute of frauds and that no writing was needed, but that the agreement to build a building pad and waterway did fall within the statute of frauds requiring a writing.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The statute is intended to prevent oral claims to the existence of a contract for the sale of land.
B) The statute requires a writing as evidence of a contract to sell land.
C) A claim to an oral contract for the sale of land is not enough to prove a contract of sale existed.
D) Mortgages on land are within the statute of frauds.
E) No leases are within the statute of frauds.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) That the contract was enforceable because agreements for professional services do not come within the protection of the statute of frauds.
B) That the contract was enforceable because of the partial-performance exception to the statute of frauds.
C) That the contract was not in writing and, therefore, could not be enforced.
D) That the contract could not be enforced because of the parol evidence rule.
E) That the contract could be enforced because of the parol evidence rule.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The purpose of the rule is to prevent evidence that substantially contradicts an agreement in its written form.
B) The rule is a rule of evidence.
C) The rule relates to substantive legal issues.
D) The rule is not a unitary concept or rule.
E) The rule is an amalgamation of different rules and conditions.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Retailed
B) Wholesale
C) Collateral
D) Consumer
E) Customized
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) That as a matter of law the oral agreement was not enforceable because there was no writing.
B) That it was up to a jury to decide if fairness mandated that Mattel be required to follow through with the admitted deal.
C) That it was up to a jury to decide matters including whether the parties intended to be bound by the oral agreement and whether an email contained the material terms of the oral contract.
D) That as a matter of law the parties intended to be bound by the oral agreement and that the email involved, sent by an agent of Mattel, contained the material terms of the oral contract thereby binding Mattel to the agreement.
E) That no writing was required because the agreement did not come within the statute of frauds.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Harry is correct.
B) Harry is incorrect because under the parol evidence rule, Rebecca, as the buyer, would be allowed to identify the subject matter in the event of a discrepancy.
C) Harry is incorrect because under the parol evidence rule, the judge would likely allow oral evidence regarding the house at issue in order to clarify an ambiguity.
D) Harry is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in situations involving an ambiguity.
E) Harry is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in the absence of a merger clause.
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) Marital solution agreement
B) Marital dissolution agreement
C) Prenuptial agreement
D) Marriage acknowledgement agreement
E) Marriage consideration agreement
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Promissory estoppel
B) Substantial estoppel
C) Promissory rule
D) Reliance rule
E) Promissory reliance
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The oral agreement will be enforced, and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving contracts conditioned on orally agreed upon terms.
B) The oral agreement will be enforced, and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving contracts that are not final as they are part written and part oral.
C) The oral agreement will be enforced, and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving contracts that are incomplete.
D) The oral agreement will be enforced, and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving evidence of prior dealings or usage of trade.
E) The medical center will prevail based upon the written contract.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Complete
B) Merger
C) Adhesion
D) Bilateral
E) Acknowledged
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Admissions, partial performance, and promissory estoppel
B) Partial performance and admissions, but not promissory estoppel
C) Promissory estoppel but not admissions or partial performance
D) Promissory estoppel and partial performance, but not admissions
E) Admissions but not partial performance or promissory estoppel
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) She was correct.
B) She was incorrect because while the UCC has a provision regarding writings for the sale of certain goods, that provision is not a part of the statute of frauds.
C) She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $1,500.
D) She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $2,000.
E) She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $5,000.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 1 - 20 of 65
Related Exams