Week 3 Quiz-Bases For Enforcing Promises

.docx

School

Liberty University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

404

Subject

Law

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BaronDanger7242

Quiz: Bases for Enforcing Promises Due Sep 11 at 11:59pm Points 110 Questions 22 Time Limit 150 Minutes Instructions The quiz: Covers the Learn material from Module 3: Week 3. Contains 22 multiple-choice, true/false, and essay questions. Is limited to 60 minutes. Allows 1 attempt. Is worth 110 points. Submit this assignment by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of Module 3: Week 3. Attempt History Attempt Time Score LATEST Attempt 1 Correct answers are hidden. Score for this quiz: 105 out of 110 Question 1 5 / 5 pts In which case did the court treat reliance as an exception to the definiteness requirement, rather than as an exception to the consideration requirement? Alaska Packers’ Assn. v. Domenico Hamer v. Sidway Mills v. Wyman Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores Question 2 5 / 5 pts Allen promises Betty that he will pay her $2,000 if Betty will paint a portrait of Allen's mother and give the portrait to Allen's mother on her birthday. Betty paints the portrait and gives it to Allen's mother on her birthday, as promised. Allen refuses to pay Betty anything. Allen argues that he is not contractually obligated to pay Betty because he did not receive any benefit from Betty. Choose the best answer. Allen is correct. No consideration was exchanged between Betty and Allen, so no contract was formed between them. Allen is correct. A party only has to keep a promise if they receive a direct benefit from the return promise. Allen is incorrect because there there is consideration between Allen and Betty and a contract was formed. Allen is correct because all promises to provide services are enforceable under law. Question 3 5 / 5 pts

Coffeeshop, Inc., is looking for a new location. It agrees to buy a small house from Gary for $280,000 if its bank will approve Coffeeshop, Inc.’s request for financing to purchase and renovate the house. The contract between Coffeeshop, Inc. and Gary is: Unenforceable, because Coffeeshop, Inc.’s duty to buy is conditioned on the actions of the bank. Enforceable because Coffeeshop, Inc. has made a promise, and all promises are adequate to constitute consideration. Unenforceable, because Coffeeshop, Inc. has no control over whether the bank approves the financing. Enforceable, because Coffeeshop, Inc. has made an enforceable conditional promise. Question 4 5 / 5 pts Seller and Buyer enter into a contract for Seller to sell 2,025 computers to Buyer. Buyer agrees to pay Seller $190,400 for the 2,025 computers. After the contract is signed by the parties, Buyer asks Seller if it would be willing to provide 2,100 computers, instead of 2,025, at no additional cost. Seller agrees to deliver 2,100 computers. Choose the best answer: Seller's promise to provide 2,100 computers is unenforceable, because no new consideration was provided. Seller's promise to provide 2,100 computers is enforceable, because Seller received something in exchange for its promise to deliver additional computers. Seller's promise to provide 2,100 computers is enforceable, because no consideration is required to make the modification enforceable. Seller's promise to provide 2,100 computers is unenforceable, because Seller had a preexisting duty to provide 2,025 computers. Question 5 5 / 5 pts Which statement does not accurately describe the nature of a party's "reliance interest?" Reliance interest is the amount of damages that places the promisee in as good a position as if the contract had never been made. Reliance interest is the amount of damages that places the promisee in as good a position as if the contract had been fully performed. Reliance interest is the amount of damages that is necessary to punish a breaching party and ensure they never breach another contract. Both b and c. Question 6 5 / 5 pts Issac contracts with Lars for Lars to market Issac’s new line of athletic clothing. Issac agrees to pay Lars 2% of any sales he generates. After three months, Issac is concerned that Lars is generating very few sales. Issac learns that Lars is facing competition from several new companies, all marketing products similar to Issac’s line of athletic clothing. In light of the increased competition, Issac and Lars agree that Lance should receive 5% of any sales he generates, instead of just 2%. Choose the best answer: The modified contract is not enforceable, because of the pre-existing duty rule.

The modified contract is not enforceable, because it includes sham consideration. The contract is enforceable, because all promises are enforceable. The modified contract is enforceable, because it is fair in light of circumstances unanticipated at the time Issac and Lars formed their contract. Question 7 5 / 5 pts Which of the following is a true statement regarding consideration? When assessing consideration, a court is concerned with whether the parties have agreed to a fair exchange and a court is not concerned with whether the exchange was bargained for. An unfair bargain cannot constitute consideration since nobody would genuinely bargain for a contract that is not fair. Even if the thing exchanged for a promise is a "sham" and not really sought in exchange for the promise, the exchange will still constitute consideration. None of the above. Question 8 5 / 5 pts Able raises llamas on his ranch. Many of the llama are very valuable because of their excellent coats. His most prized llama wanders off the ranch. Able is concerned because llamas face many natural predators outside of the ranch. Fortunately, the llama wanders into a neighboring farmer's ranch. The owner of that ranch, Bart, provides food, water and shelter for the llama for seven days until Able is able to retrieve the llama. When Able retrieves the llama he promises to send Bart a check for $250 to compensate Bart for his time an expense in caring for the llama. What is Bart's best argument to enforce Able's promise to pay $250? That Able's promise was made in recognition of a past benefit provided by Bart to Able. That Able's promise was bargained for in exchange for Bart's services. That Bart's services were provide in reliance on Able's promise. That all promises are legally enforceable. Question 9 5 / 5 pts Homeowner enters into a contract with Roofing Company to replace Homeowner’s roof. The contract price is $14,000, payable after the completion of the work. Roofing Company fails to do any of the work, and Homeowner pays Roofing Company nothing. Homeowner has to pay $15,500 to another roofing contractor to replace the roof. Which of the following correctly describes Homeowner’s “expectation interest”? Homeowner’s expectation interest is $0. Homeowner’s expectation interest is $1,500. Homeowner’s expectation interest is $14,000. Homeowner’s expectation interest is $15,500. Question 10 5 / 5 pts Which of the following contracts is subject to the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)?

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help