Contracts LAW616 Midterm Multiple Choice Quiz

.pdf

School

Taft Law School *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

616

Subject

Law

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

11

Uploaded by MagistrateJackal3809

Report
3/15/24, 8:17 PM Midterm Multiple Choice: Attempt review | Taft University System https://online.taft.edu/mod/quiz/review.php?attempt=77768&cmid=83720 1/11 Started on Friday, 15 March 2024, 4:58 PM State Finished Completed on Friday, 15 March 2024, 5:16 PM Time taken 17 mins 54 secs Grade 95.00 out of 100.00 Information Question 1 Correct Mark 5.00 out of 5.00 Questions 1 through 3 are based on the following fact situation: On May 1, Ohner telegraphed Byer, “Will sell you any or all of the lots in Grover subdivision at $5,000 each. Details follow in letter.” The letter contained all the necessary details concerning terms of payment, insurance, mortgages, etc., and provided, “This offer remains open until June 1.” On May 2, after he had received the telegram but before he had received the letter, Byer telegraphed Ohner, “Accept your offer with respect to lot 101.” Both parties knew that there were fifty lots in the Grove subdivision and that they were numbered 101 through 150. For this question only, assume that Ohner and Byer were bound by a contract for the sale of lot 101 for $5,000, that on May 3, Ohner telephoned Byer that because he had just discovered that a shopping center was going to be erected adjacent to the Grove subdivision, he would "have to have $6,000 for each of the lots including lot 101", that Byer thereupon agreed to pay him $6,000 for lot 101 and that on May 6, Byer telegraphed, "Accept your offer with respect to the rest of the lots." Assuming that the two contracts were formed and that there is no controlling statute, Byer will most likely be required to pay: Select one: A. Only $5,000 for each of the fifty lots. B. Only $5,000 for lot 101, but $6,000 for the remaining forty-nine lots. C. $6,000 for each of the fifty lots. D. $6,000 for lot 101, but only $5,000 for the remaining forty-nine lots. The correct answer is: Only $5,000 for lot 101, but $6,000 for the remaining forty-nine lots.
3/15/24, 8:17 PM Midterm Multiple Choice: Attempt review | Taft University System https://online.taft.edu/mod/quiz/review.php?attempt=77768&cmid=83720 2/11 Question 2 Correct Mark 5.00 out of 5.00 Question 3 Correct Mark 5.00 out of 5.00 For this question only, assume that on May 5, Ohner telephoned Byer that he had sold lots 102 through 150 to someone else on May 4 and that Byer thereafter telegraphed Ohner, "Will take the rest of the lots." Assume further that there is no controlling statute. In an action by Byer against Ohner for breach of contract, Byer probably will: Select one: A. Succeed because Ohner had promised him that the offer would remain open until June 1. B. Succeed, because Ohner's attempted revocation was by telephone. C. Not succeed, because Byer's power of acceptance was terminated by Ohner's sale of the lots to another party. D. Not succeed, because Byer's power of acceptance was terminated by effective revocation. The correct answer is: Not succeed, because Byer's power of acceptance was terminated by effective revocation. For this question only, assume that on May 6, Byer telegraphed Ohner, "Will take the rest of the lots," and that on May 8, Ohner discovered that he did not have good title to the remaining lots. Which of the following would provide the best legal support to Ohner's contention that he was not liable for breach of contract as to the remaining forty-nine lots? Select one: A. Impossibility of performance. B. Unilateral mistake as to basic assumption. C. Termination of the offer by Byer's having first contracted to buy lot 101. D. Excuse by failure of an implied condition precedent. The correct answer is: Termination of the offer by Byer's having first contracted to buy lot 101.
3/15/24, 8:17 PM Midterm Multiple Choice: Attempt review | Taft University System https://online.taft.edu/mod/quiz/review.php?attempt=77768&cmid=83720 3/11 Question 4 Incorrect Mark 0.00 out of 5.00 Information Question 5 Correct Mark 5.00 out of 5.00 Brown contended that Green owed him $6,000. Green denied that he owed Brown anything. Tired of the dispute, Green eventually signed a promissory note by which he promised to pay Brown $5,000 in settlement of their dispute. In an action by Brown against Green on the promissory note, which of the following, if true, would afford Green the best defense? Select one: A. Although Brown honestly believed that $6,000 was owed by Green, Green knew that it was not owed. B. Although Brown knew that the debt was not owed, Green honestly was in doubt whether it was owed. C. The original claim was based on an oral agreement, which the Statute of Frauds required to be in writing. D. The original claim was an action on a contract, which was barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations. The correct answer is: Although Brown honestly believed that $6,000 was owed by Green, Green knew that it was not owed. Questions 5, 6 and 7 are based on the following fact situation: Paul and Daniel entered a contract in writing on November 1, the essential part of which read as follows: “Paul to supply Daniel with 200 personalized Christmas cards on or before December 15 bearing a photograph of Daniel and his family, and Daniel to pay $100 thirty days thereafter. Photograph to be taken by Paul at Daniel’s house. Cards guaranteed to be fully satisfactory and on time.” Because Daniel suddenly became ill, Paul was unable to take the necessary photograph of Daniel and his family until the first week of December. The final week’s delay was caused by Paul’s not being notified promptly by Daniel of his recovery. Before the photograph of Daniel and his family, Paul advised Daniel that he was likely to be delayed a day or two beyond December 15 in making delivery because of the time required to process the photograph and cards. Daniel told Paul to take the photograph anyway. The cards were finally delivered by Paul to Daniel on December 17. Paul having diligently worked on them in the interim. Although the cards pleased the rest of the family, Daniel refused to accept them because, as he said squinting at one of the cards at arm’s length without bothering to put on his reading glasses, “The photograph makes me look too old. Besides, the cards weren’t delivered on time.” In an action by Paul against Daniel, which of the following would be Daniel's best defense? Select one: A. The cards, objectively viewed, were not satisfactory. B. The cards, subjectively viewed, were not satisfactory. C. The cards were not delivered on time. D. Daniel's illness excused him from further obligation under the contract. The correct answer is: The cards, subjectively viewed, were not satisfactory.
3/15/24, 8:17 PM Midterm Multiple Choice: Attempt review | Taft University System https://online.taft.edu/mod/quiz/review.php?attempt=77768&cmid=83720 4/11 Question 6 Correct Mark 5.00 out of 5.00 Question 7 Correct Mark 5.00 out of 5.00 Which of the following statements is most accurate? Select one: A. Payment by Daniel of the $100 was a condition precedent to Paul's duty of performance. B. The performances of Paul and Daniel under the contract were concurrently conditional. C. Payment by Daniel of the $100 was a condition subsequent to Paul's duty of performance. D. Performance by Paul under the contract was a condition precedent to Daniel's duty of payment of the $100. The correct answer is: Performance by Paul under the contract was a condition precedent to Daniel's duty of payment of the $100. Which of the following statements regarding the legal effect of Daniel's illness is LEAST accurate? Select one: A. Daniel's illness and the related developments excused Paul from his obligations to deliver the cards on or before December 15. B. Prompt notice by Daniel to Paul of Daniel's recovery from illness was an implied condition of Paul's duty under the circumstances. C. Paul was under a duty of immediate performance of his promise to deliver the cards, as of December 15, by reason of the express language of the contract and despite the illness of Daniel and the related developments. D. Daniel's conduct after his illness constituted a waiver of the necessity of Paul's performing on or before December 15. The correct answer is: Paul was under a duty of immediate performance of his promise to deliver the cards, as of December 15, by reason of the express language of the contract and despite the illness of Daniel and the related developments.
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