Question 1 (12 points)
Saved
On February 1, Lumber Store Owner offered to sell 2,500 board feet of 8 x 10 lumber to Hardware Store Owner for $5,000. Lumber Store Owner gave Hardware Store Owner a signed writing which recited the offer and stated that Lumber Store Owner promised not to revoke the offer for a period of 100 days. On February 25, Lumber Store Owner sold the lumber to another buyer for a higher price. Hardware Store Owner wrote Lumber Store Owner on March 5, stating that, “I accept your offer to sell 2,500 board feet of 8 x 10 lumber, and please see attached a check for $5,000 as full payment for this purchase.” Lumber Store Owner wrote back that he could not sell the lumber to Hardware Store Owner because it had been sold on February 25 to another buyer. If Hardware Store Owner sues Lumber Store Owner, which of the following would a court be most likely to find?
Question 1 options:
a) No contract was formed, because Lumber Store Owner was legally entitled on February 25 to sell the lumber for a better price to someone other than Hardware Store Owner because the stated period of irrevocability was too long.
b) No contract was formed, because Hardware Store Owner did not pay any consideration to Lumber Store Owner to keep the offer open.
c) A contract was formed, because Lumber Store Owner was not entitled to sell the lumber to another person without first checking with Hardware Store Owner to see if Hardware Store Owner intended to accept the offer during the 100-day stated period.
d) A contract was formed, because Hardware Store Owner accepted the offer through his letter of March 5.
Question 2 (12 points)
Saved
Bob offered to sell a specified quantity of goods to Tom for a price of $750. Tom accepted the offer, and sent a $750 check to Bob. Tom also sent a letter to Bob to confirm the agreement, stating that his acceptance was conditioned upon Bob adding an item to the order that Tom wanted. Bob did not want to add the item, and he (Bob) immediately sent a letter to Tom to this effect, returning Tom’s $750 check uncashed. What fact, if shown to be true, would best support Bob’s contention that a valid contract was not formed?
Question 2 options:
a) That Bob objected immediately and returned Tom’s check after receipt of Tom’s letter.
b) That Tom and Bob were both merchants.
c) That the new item altered the agreement.
d) That the offer was not ironclad.
Question 3 (12 points)
Saved
Construction Worker placed a bid on installing a wheelchair access ramp in Recreation Center’s front entrance in compliance with applicable building codes. Construction Worker calculated her design and submitted a $1,500 bid for the wheelchair access ramp. Unknown to Construction Worker, her bid mistakenly included a design specification for a ramp at 40 degrees pitch. Recreation Center looked at Construction Worker’s plans and bid. Recreation Center realized that the pitch needed to be at twenty degrees or lower to comply with building codes, but they were glad to get such a low bid. Construction Worker’s bid of $1,500 was accepted by Recreation Center, and she (Construction Worker) was awarded the contract to build the ramp. Later, Construction Worker realized that her bid included the 40 degree pitch design specification. According to building code guidelines, the slope of the ramp could not exceed twenty degrees. Such a change in slope required not only significantly more materials, but also a major change in the construction plans. The extra materials and change in plans would cost Construction Worker an extra $1,000. Construction Worker told Recreation Center she would refuse to build the ramp unless she was paid the extra $1,000. If Recreation Center declines to pay the extra $1,000, and sues Construction Worker for breach of contract, in most jurisdictions the court will find for which party?
Question 3 options:
a) Construction Worker, because Recreation Center was aware of the actual slope needed for wheelchair access ramps.
b) Recreation Center, because Construction Worker accepted the responsibility of submitting her own bid.
c) Construction Worker, because there was a mutual mistake.
d) Recreation Center, because they were not mistaken about the required slope.
Question 4 (12 points)
Hunting Guide agreed to take Greenhorn on a hunting expedition into a remote area of the Alaskan wilderness. Greenhorn orally agreed to pay Hunting Guide $1,000, for which Hunting Guide orally agreed to help Greenhorn successfully navigate the treacherous terrain in Alaska for exactly seven days, from January 14 – 21. They dictated the specifics of their agreement to Country Grocer, who had a typewriter. After Country Grocer typed the agreement, Hunting Guide and Greenhorn both signed the agreement. Country Grocer, not a typist by nature, mistyped $10 as the price Greenhorn was to pay Hunting Guide, instead of $1,000. If Greenhorn refused to pay more than $10 for the hunting expedition, in an action by Hunting Guide for the additional $990, Hunting Guide should try to establish that:
Question 4 options:
a) There was a misunderstanding between Hunting Guide and Greenhorn concerning the purchase price.
b) Country Grocer should pay the additional $990.
c) The agreement was only a partial integration.
d) There was a mistake in integration by Country Grocer.
Question 5 (12 points)
Home Owner asked Carpenter to build him a deck. Carpenter verbally agreed that she would use redwood lumber to build an 8-foot by 12-foot deck in Home Owner’s backyard. The work was to begin immediately, with Carpenter finishing in three weeks. Carpenter was to be paid $1,000 up front from Home Owner, and $1,500 upon completion of the job. To verify the agreement, Home Owner wrote the above facts on a piece of paper with a pen, which they both signed. When Carpenter finished her work, Home Owner paid the $1,500. However, Home Owner was upset that Carpenter did not include steps from the edge of the deck to the pool. Carpenter declined to put steps on the deck, saying that she had completed the job as they had agreed. If Home Owner brings an action against Carpenter, what is the most important point that Home Owner should bring to the court’s attention?
Question 5 options:
a) That he (Home Owner) would have typed the agreement if he had had a typewriter.
b) That the written agreement was only a partial integration.
c) That steps on an outside deck are not an expectable item.
d) That Home Owner told Carpenter on the tenth day to remember that he (Home Owner) expected that steps be included from the top of the deck to the pool.
Question 6 (12 points)
Street Seller offered Pedestrian two necklaces that Pedestrian could purchase. Street Seller told Pedestrian that she was offering a great deal to Pedestrian, at a bargain price. However, Street Seller told Pedestrian that the offer to purchase the necklaces had to be accepted immediately. Necklace A was offered to Pedestrian for $15, and Necklace B was offered to Pedestrian for $50. Pedestrian could purchase either, or both, necklaces. Pedestrian accepted the offer to buy Necklace B for $50, paid $50 and received Necklace B, and then walked away. An hour later, Pedestrian came back and tendered $15 to Street Seller stating that she was buying Necklace A for $15. However, Street Seller refused to take the $15 and stated she would only sell Necklace A to Pedestrian for $25. Was Street Seller obligated to sell Necklace A to Pedestrian for $15 when Pedestrian attempted to purchase it?
Question 6 options:
a) No, because the offer by Street Seller to sell Necklace A to Pedestrian for $15 was no longer a valid offer at the time that Pedestrian tried to buy Necklace A.
b) Yes, because it was legally unconscionable for Street Seller to put so much time pressure on Pedestrian to make up Pedestrian’s mind.
c) No, because the offer by Street Seller to sell Necklace A to Pedestrian was not in writing.
d) Yes, because both Necklace A and Necklace B were included in the original offer by Street Seller to Pedestrian.
Question 7 (12 points)
Jewel was a film student who decided to sell her movie projection system to raise money to pay for tuition. Jewel sent a letter to Grocery Store Owner stating that, “If you (Grocery Store Owner) would like to buy my state-of-the-art movie projection system, I will sell it to you for $5,000. Further, I will keep the offer open for sixty days from today, January 10, so that you can have plenty of time to think about the offer.” A week later, on January 17, Jewel saw Grocery Store Owner on the street. Jewel told Grocery Store Owner that she (Jewel) was retracting the offer, and did not want to sell the movie projection system to Grocery Store Owner, because she was selling it to someone else at a higher price. On January 18, Grocery Store Owner wrote a letter to Jewel stating that, “I am still thinking about your offer to buy the movie projection system. Please see enclosed check for $100 to hold the offer open for sixty days from January 10, so that I can make up my mind.” If Grocery Store Owner sues Jewel for breach of contract, what would be the most likely result?
Question 7 options:
a) Judgment for Jewel, because she revoked the offer during her conversation with Grocery Store Owner on January 17.
b) Judgment for Grocery Store Owner, because Jewel expressly stated that the offer would be held open for 60 days.
c) Judgment for Jewel, because she got a better price than what she offered to Grocery Store Owner for the movie projection system.
d) Judgment for Grocery Store Owner, because she gave consideration to Jewel on January 18 by paying $100 to Jewel.
Question 8 (12 points)
Calvin told his friend Hannah that if she could climb Mount Everest, he would give her $25,000. To bind the agreement, Hannah gave Calvin $100, which he accepted. Six months later, Hannah successfully climbed Mount Everest. Unfortunately, before she had successfully climbed Mount Everest, Calvin had died. When Hannah tried to recover the money from Calvin’s estate, the estate administrator refused to honor the claim on the basis that: (1) no contract existed and that even if it did, (2) the contract was oral and unenforceable without sufficient written proof. If Hannah goes to court to enforce the promise made by Calvin, what is the most probable result?
Question 8 options:
a) Denied, because the offer terminated at Calvin’s death.
b) Denied, because the contract would fail under the Statute of Frauds.
c) Granted, because Calvin’s promise was supported by consideration.
d) Granted, because Calvin was sincere about his promise.
Question 9 (12 points)
Harriet entered into a contract with Ophelia which stated that Ophelia owed Harriet $250 for a bonus which was never paid. Ophelia did not pay the $250, and Harriet sued for breach of contract. What would be the best argument for Ophelia?
Question 9 options:
a) That it was a mistake for Ophelia to enter into a contract with Harriet.
b) That the agreement was not fully integrated.
c) That Harriet had more capital than did Ophelia.
d) That Harriet knew that Ophelia’s agent had already paid the bonus.
Question 10 (12 points)
Harley and Nancy were friends. Harley called Nancy and left Nancy a voice message stating that she (Nancy) could buy Harley’s motorcycle for $4,000. Nancy later retrieved the message and after considering the offer from Harley, Nancy decided to buy Harley’s motorcycle for $4,000. Nancy called Harley and left a message on Harley’s telephone answering machine stating that she (Nancy) had decided to buy the motorcycle. Later that day, and without first hearing the telephone message from Nancy, Harley saw Nancy at the store. Harley then told Nancy that she (Harley) was taking back her offer to sell Nancy the motorcycle. Did Nancy validly accept Harley’s offer?
Question 10 options:
a) No, because Harley has the ability to revoke an offer as an offeror, and a revocation is effective as soon as it is received.
b) No, because Harley did not hear Nancy’s telephone answering machine message before Harley revoked the offer.
c) Yes, because Harley could not validly withdraw an offer without talking to Nancy first, since Nancy was technically an offeree.
d) Yes, because Nancy’s telephone voice-mail message was a valid acceptance that occurred before Harley tried to revoke the offer.
Question 11 (12 points)
Calvin and Elmer entered into a valid written contract which stated in part that “Calvin was to pay Elmer $250 if Elmer won the town bicycle race wearing a shirt advertising Calvin’s restaurant.” Later, Elmer contacted Calvin’s brother, Bruno, who warned Elmer that he (Bruno) did not believe that Calvin would pay the $250 even if Elmer did actually win the race wearing the shirt. Then, Bruno, in a signed writing, promised Elmer that if Calvin reneged on the contract, that he (Bruno) would pay the $250 to Elmer, just because it was the right thing to do. Sure enough, Elmer won the bicycle race wearing the proper shirt. Calvin refused to pay the $250. However, Bruno has also failed to pay the $250. If Elmer brings suit against Bruno for the $250 and succeeds it will most likely be because:
Question 11 options:
a) Bruno had a moral obligation to pay the $250 as promised.
b) Bruno’s promise to Elmer was in a signed writing.
c) Elmer owed a pre-existing duty to Calvin.
d) The agreement was induced by fraud.
Question 12 (12 points)
Mother asked Daughter if Daughter would go into the family business. At first, Daughter was reluctant to go into the family business, as Daughter wanted to strike out on her own. Then, Mother said that Mother would give Daughter a bonus of $7,500 annually for five years if Daughter entered the family business. Daughter agreed, and they both signed a written contract to the effect that for every year for the next five years that Daughter worked in the family business, Mother would give Daughter a $7,500 bonus, in addition to a regular monthly salary. Unfortunately, Mother died before the end of the second year. When Daughter tried to get Daughter’s bonus, Mother’s estate refused to give the bonus to Daughter. If Daughter brings an action against Mother’s estate to collect Daughter’s bonus, and the only defense raised is a lack of consideration, what would be the probable result?
Question 12 options:
a) Judgment for Mother’s estate, because the $7,500 was promised only as a bonus.
b) Judgment for Mother’s estate, Mother was not present to give out the bonus each year after the first year.
c) Judgment for Daughter, because there was a bargained for exchange for Mother’s promise.
d) Judgment for Daughter, because Daughter relied to her detriment on the offer from Mother.
Question 13 (12 points)
On February 5, Developer wrote a letter to Book Store Owner, stating that she (Developer) would sell Book Store Owner five acres of commercial land for $25,000. In the signed writing, Developer also said that she would keep the offer open for twenty days. Book Store Owner, in reliance on the statement that Developer would keep the offer open for twenty days, took some time to decide whether or not to buy the land from Developer. On February 18, Developer called Book Store Owner on the telephone and stated that the offer to buy the commercial land was revoked. Two days later, Book Store Owner sent Developer a letter with a $25,000 check, stating that Book Store Owner accepted the offer to buy the commercial land. If Book Store Owner brings suit against Developer for breach of contract, what is the most probable result?
Question 13 options:
a) Judgment for Book Store Owner, because Developer offered to keep the offer open for twenty days.
b) Judgment for Book Store Owner, because Book Store Owner relied on Developer’s statement to hold the offer open for twenty days.
c) Judgment for Developer, unless Developer is considered to be a merchant with respect to the sale of commercial land.
d) Judgment for Developer, because Book Store Owner did not give consideration to Developer.
Question 14 (12 points)
Jerri owned a fitness center. She sent a letter to Sporting Goods Manufacturer asking for a quote regarding buying 50 XYZ model abdominal machines for her fitness center. Sporting Goods Manufacturer responded in a letter to Jerri stating that it was shipping 50 XYZ model abdominal machines at $45 each. Jerri received the 50 XYZ abdominal machines the following day. Jerri sent a check for the appropriate amount, along with a letter stating that she (Jerri) accepted the offer from Sporting Goods Manufacturer for the 50 XYZ model abdominal machines. Assuming a valid contract exists, at which point in time is it most likely that Jerri and Sporting Goods Manufacturer entered into a contract for the 50 XYZ abdominal machines?
Question 14 options:
a) When Sporting Goods Manufacturer sent the abdominal machines to Jerri within a reasonable amount of time after receipt of Jerri’s letter.
b) When Jerri received Sporting Goods Manufacturer’s letter.
c) When Jerri sent her check and letter to Sporting Goods Manufacturer after she (Jerri) received Sporting Goods Manufacturer’s letter.
d) When Sporting Goods Manufacturer received the Jerri’s payment check.
Question 15 (12 points)
Jones, a basket weaver, made an offer to Smith to sell Smith five handmade baskets at $25 each, for resale by Smith in Smith’s store. Jones brought a sample basket to show Smith. The sample basket was decorated with a red ribbon. Smith accepted Jones’ offer with a check for the appropriate amount and included a note stating that Smith expected that Jones could provide each basket with a green ribbon. Upon receipt of the Smith’s note, Jones called Smith and refused to sell the baskets with green ribbon. Jones thought that the use of green ribbon instead of red effectively ruined the artistic integrity of the handmade baskets. Smith brought suit against Jones for breach of contract. If the court rules in favor of Smith, it will most likely be because:
Question 15 options:
a) Jones is not considered a merchant with respect to this transaction.
b) Smith relied on the use of green ribbons to increase sales of the baskets.
c) The addition of the ribbons was not a material alteration of the contract.
d) Jones objected to the addition of the ribbons two days after Smith accepted the offer.
Question 16 (12 points)
Dudley had a piece of land on the edge of a proposed shopping complex that he wanted to sell. Rinehart offered Dudley $150,000 for the land with a 30-day option to buy for $500. Dudley knew that Rinehart wanted to sell the land for profit if she was granted the option. Therefore, Dudley decided not to sell the land to Rinehart and instead decided to find a purchaser for himself. Rinehart said to Dudley, “Make me a written offer to sell your land for $150,000 for 30 days. It can be revocable at your will. I will pay you $500 tomorrow if you do.” Dudley agreed and gave Rinehart a written document that indicated that for 30 days, he offered his land near the new shopping center to Rinehart for $150,000. This offer was revocable at his will and pleasure any time before acceptance. Later that same day, Edwards, Dudley’s friend, said she knew someone who would probably buy Dudley’s land for $200,000. Dudley inquired further and was told by Edwards that Gibbons, also a resident of the same city, was a likely purchaser. Edwards indicated to Dudley that she would contact Gibson for Dudley and also indicated that she expected Dudley to pay her the usual brokerage for finding him a buyer. Dudley made no reply to this. Dudley then called Rinehart late in the day to tell her that her written offer was revoked and that Dudley wanted her to pay him the $500. Rinehart refused to pay this. Dudley then sold the land to Gibbons for $210,000, but he did not pay Edwards anything. Rinehart’s statement to Dudley and Dudley’s subsequent writing would create the basis of which of the following?
Question 16 options:
a) Unilateral contract.
b) Firm option.
c) Quasi-contractual liability.
d) Pre-contractual liability by promissory estoppel.
Question 17 (12 points)
Bill Embree lived in Japan. He wrote the Pluto Motors Agency in his hometown in California and told them that his son, Ed, wanted to buy a car. He indicated in a letter to them that he would guarantee the purchase price of any car for his son under $15,000. The Pluto dealership received Bill’s letter on February 9th and sold a car to Ed for $11,500. Ed got $1,500 on his trade-in and put another $1,000 down. The balance was to be paid within eighteen months. Bill died suddenly on February 11th. The Pluto Agency was not aware of this and sent a letter back to Bill in Japan indicating their acceptance of Bill’s offer. They indicated, however, that Ed had good credit with them and they had already planned to extend him credit for the car purchase even before they received Bill’s letter. Ed was killed in April while driving his new car and he and his estate are bankrupt. The Pluto Agency wants the balance of the car’s purchase price.
Would they be successful in a suit against Bill’s estate for the balance at the time it becomes fully due?
Question 17 options:
a) No, since the Pluto Agency would have sold the car to Ed even without Bill’s guarantee of the purchase price.
b) No, since Bill died before the Pluto Agency mailed the letter notifying him of their acceptance.
c) Yes, since the Pluto Agency had accepted Bill’s offer before his death.
d) Yes, since the Pluto Agency foreseeable, justifiably, and reasonably relied on Bill’s promise to them.
Question 18 (12 points)
Lynn Lyons had established a good dental practice in Riverton. She agreed with Gamma Dental Supply Company to purchase from them all of her required supplies for two years. She also decided to move into a new, expanded office, and ordered three new dental chairs from the Frane Company. The cost of the chairs was $9,000 and it was fully payable 60 days after delivery. The agreement with Gamma was mainly oral. The only document that could prove the agreement is a letter Lyons signed that outlines the general nature of her agreement to buy from them all of her required supplies. It contained no other specific terms. Gamma had signed no documents. Can Gamma enforce their agreement?
Question 18 options:
a) Under the UCC, Gamma can enforce it.
b) Gamma cannot enforce it since the writing is not sufficient.
c) Gamma cannot enforce it since neither party agreed to a quantity term.
d) Gamma cannot enforce it since Lyons’ promise was illusory.
Question 19 (12 points)
O’Toole was a longtime enthusiast of old cars. He had long wanted to own a Model-T Ford in running condition. Until last year, he had never been able to afford one. He then received a large insurance settlement, so he placed an ad in the paper. His ad said that he “would pay $50 to every person who can give me a good lead on the purchase of a Model-T in operable condition.” Gibson knew that O’Toole had always wanted a Model-T but he was not aware of O’Toole’s ad. Gibson did not read newspapers because he felt that they used up too many trees in the forest. Gibson told O’Toole one day that he knew someone at work who had a Model-T that he might be willing to sell. Gibson’s friend was Pritchard. O’Toole contacted Pritchard and bought the Model-T two days later. A week later, Gibson found out about the ad O’Toole had run and demanded that O’Toole pay him $50. Is O’Toole required to pay the $50 based on what he placed in his ad?
Question 19 options:
a) No, since an advertisement is never an offer.
b) No, since Gibson was not aware of O’Toole’s offer when he gave O’Toole the information about Pritchard.
c) Yes, since Gibson performed as requested by O’Toole’s advertisement.
d) Yes, since O’Toole bought the Model-T from Pritchard based on what Gibson told him.
Question 20 (12 points)
Mark Ford, a contractor, entered into an agreement with Jim Wathen to construct a fireplace on Wathen’s home in July. The price for the fireplace was $5,000 and construction was to be finished by October 1st. Ford quickly began work but found that the house walls had been constructed more solidly than expected. This was unusual for homes in the neighborhood. Ford notified Wathen immediately when he found the problem with the walls. He indicated to Wathen that it would cost an extra $1,500 in additional labor and materials. Wathen needed the fireplace by winter so he agreed to the increase, although reluctantly. Ford completed the work on September 29th. Wathen must pay Ford:
Question 20 options:
a) Only $5,000, since the Statute of Frauds would apply.
b) Only $5,000, since Ford had a pre-existing duty to build the fireplace.
c) The full $6,500, if under the circumstances their modification was fair and equitable.
d) The full $6,500 if the additional work was reasonably worth the original $5,000 price.
Question 21 (12 points)
Jay Polk entered into an agreement with Mary Webster. Polk agreed to manufacture and Webster agreed to buy 2,000 Executive reclining Office Chairs. The price of the chairs is $120 per chair. An additional clause in the agreement indicated that both parties expressly agreed that Webster would be under no obligation under the terms of the contract unless the 2,000 chairs were delivered to Webster at her warehouse no later than January 2. On January 2, 1,825 chairs were delivered to Webster’s warehouse. All of these chairs met her requirement and specifications. The remaining 175 chairs were delivered on January 5. Again, all of the chairs met her requirements and specifications. Webster then refused to accept any of the chairs. The provisions that Webster was under no liability unless the 2,000 chairs were delivered to her at her warehouse on January 2 is:
Question 21 options:
a) An express condition of the contract.
b) An implied condition of the contract.
c) A promise but not a condition of the contract.
d) Neither a promise nor a condition of the contract.
Question 22 (12 points)
Janice Granger, a 22-year-old college student, went out for a drive in her father’s pickup truck. She drove very negligently on this particular day and crashed into a car driven by Louis Zediker. Both Louis and Janice were injured in the crash. Janice’s father, Pete Granger, believed that he (Pete Granger) was liable for the accident, although he erroneously believed this. He spoke with Louis in his hospital room when he was recovering. Granger told Louis that he would personally reimburse him for any losses he suffered as a result of the accident. He also told Louis’s doctor, Dr. Page, to take good care of Louis and that he would pay Louis’s bill. After a short time, Janice died as a result of her injuries, leaving no assets. A friend of Janice’s, Charles Skinner, wrote to Pete Granger and maintained that Janice owed him $350 for some stereo equipment he sold her. He also indicated he was going to file a claim against Janice’s estate to recover the money she owed him. Pete told Charles that if he would not file a claim against Janice’s estate that he would pay Charles the money for the stereo equipment. What would be Pete’s best defense if Louis files suit against Pete for the value of wages lost while Louis was recovering from the accident?
Question 22 options:
a) The Statute of Frauds.
b) His indefinite promise to Dr. Page.
c) A mistake of fact as to basic assumption.
d) A lack of consideration.
Question 23 (12 points)
Anne Rodgers was getting married and she entered into an agreement with Bill Morse who would provide her wedding announcements. The wedding was set for June 10th, and Morse agreed to provide 250 announcements on or before May 1st. The announcements would contain a photograph of Anne and her fiancé that was to be pasted separately onto one side of the announcement. Anne was to pay $625 to Morse on June 1st. Morse would also take the photo of Anne and her fiancé at a nearby park. Morse was to deliver the announcements on time and he guaranteed Anne’s satisfaction. In early April, Morse was called out of town because of a family emergency, and he was not able to take the photo of Anne and her fiancé until April 20th. He indicated to Anne that the announcements would be a week late. On May 5th he told Anne that the announcements would probably not be ready until the 10th because of a delay in the time required to process the photographs and to paste them onto the announcements. Anne told him to go ahead because she was waiting for them and she needed to get them mailed out to relatives and friends. Morse worked very hard to get the announcements ready and he delivered them to Anne on May 11th. Anne’s family and fiancé really liked the announcements but Anne rejected them because she thought her hair looked bad in the photo and she thought Morse had not photographed her best side. She also rejected them because they weren’t ready on May 1st as promised. Of the following statements, the most accurate is:
Question 23 options:
a) Anne’s obligation to pay the $625 was a condition subsequent to Morse’s obligation to perform.
b) Morse’s obligation to perform was a condition precedent to Anne’s obligation to pay the $625.
c) Anne’s obligation to pay the $625 was a condition precedent to Morse’s obligation to perform.
d) The obligations of Anne and Morse were concurrently conditional.
Question 24 (12 points)
Palmer was a manufacturer of lamps and other household products. She had purchased materials for glass production from Acme since she had started her business. Acme notified Palmer in late 2011 that it was going to have to substantially raise its prices for the materials Palmer used. She had to search around for another supplier for the materials she needed because she had to keep her prices low to compete. In November 2011, she came across Standard Distributors. She asked them how much it would cost to purchase her glassmaking materials from Standard in 2012. She indicated that during the calendar year of 2011 her total use would be 5,000 pounds of material. She received a letter a few days later which indicated Standard could supply her at a rate of 85 cents a pound and that they could supply her with all the material she needed. Palmer wrote back to them accepting their offer. What is the quantity term?
Question 24 options:
a) 5,000 pounds.
b) A reasonable quantity not in excess of 5,000 pounds.
c) Whatever amount Palmer needs for business use not unreasonably disproportionate to 5,000 pounds.
d) Whatever amount Palmer needs for business or personal use not unreasonably disproportionate to 5,000 pounds.
Question 25 (12 points)
Janice Granger, a 22-year-old college student, went out for a drive in her father’s pickup truck. She drove very negligently on this particular day and crashed into a car driven by Louis Zediker. Both Louis and Janice were injured in the crash. Janice’s father, Pete Granger, believed that he was liable for the accident, although he erroneously believed this. He spoke with Louis in his hospital room when he was recovering. Granger told Louis that he would personally reimburse him for any losses he suffered as a result of the accident. He also told Louis’s doctor, Dr. Page, to take good care of Louis and that he would pay Louis’s bill. After a short time, Janice died as a result of her injuries, leaving no assets. A friend of Janice’s, Charles Skinner, wrote to Pete Granger and maintained that Janice owed him $350 for some stereo equipment he sold her. He did this in good faith. He also indicated he was going to file a claim against Janice’s estate to recover the money she owed him. Pete told Charles that if he would not file a claim against Janice’s estate that he would pay Charles the money for the stereo equipment. Would Charles be successful in an action against Pete for $350 if he did not file a suit against Janice’s estate?
Question 25 options:
a) No, since the claim against Janice’s estate was worthless.
b) No, since Pete’s obligation to pay Janice’s debt was, at best, a moral one.
c) Yes, since Charles had relied detrimentally on Janice’s promise to pay.
d) Yes, since a bargained-for exchange supported Pete’s promise to pay.
