Ellis agreed to paint Lee's house for $1500. A month before the performance was due, Lee called and told Ellis that she had changed her mind and was going to have her house stuccoed instead. Ellis insisted that they had a contract and that he was going to paint the house anyway. Lee repeated that she was not going to go through with it, but Ellis insisted the contract was still on. Before further steps could be taken by either party, Lee's house was destroyed by a freak airplane accident. Which one of the following statements describes the law applicable to these facts?
A) Ellis's conduct amounted to repudiation, and Lee could have sued for breach of contract immediately after the phone call.
B) Lee could have accepted Ellis's conduct as an anticipatory breach.
C) The contract has been discharged by frustration.
D) Ellis will be able to successfully claim as damages the amount that he would have made if the contract had been performed.
E) Lee's conduct did not amount to a breach since she told him a month before performance was due that she didn't want the house painted.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q25: When a contract anticipates some catastrophic event,
Q26: A contract is terminated by agreement in
Q27: In which of the following is the
Q28: A term in a contract that says
Q29: If a contract states that the contract
Q31: Rahilly entered into a contract with Khan,
Q32: Which of the following is true with
Q33: Gill, a wholesale fish seller, agreed to
Q34: Monroe sold computers. On the purchase of
Q35: Which one of the following statements accurately
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents