What was the result in Heritage Constructors, Inc. v. Chrietzberg Electric, Inc., and Richard Marc Chrietzberg, the case in the text in which the plaintiff, a general contractor, filed a breach of contract action against the defendant, an electrical subcontractor that withdrew its bid right before the contract was to be performed? The defendant claimed the agreement did not satisfy the statute of frauds and that the general contractor's breach of contract claim was barred.
A) Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed because, although none of the writings mention the plaintiff, oral testimony was admissible to supply an essential term of the agreement.
B) Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed because the writings along with oral testimony were sufficient to satisfy the status of frauds.
C) The plaintiff's claim was dismissed because none of the writings mention the plaintiff or identify the plaintiff as a party to the contract, and oral testimony was necessary to supply an essential term of the agreement, and thus they are insufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds.
D) The plaintiff's claim was dismissed because the oral agreement was unenforceable because there was no writing.
E) Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed since no writing was required because the agreement did not come within the statute of frauds.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q43: Which of the following is true regarding
Q44: A[n] _ clause is one way parties
Q45: Which of the following is false regarding
Q46: [Not So Rich Uncle] Gabriel is attempting
Q47: Which of the following is true regarding
Q49: In the "parol evidence rule," what does
Q50: Lima called Mark and asked him to
Q51: Which of the following is false regarding
Q52: Written contracts intended to be the complete
Q53: A(n) _ clause is often included by
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