Question 1

A offers B $100,000 for his farm, and they sign an agreement for the sale. Before the money is paid, A finds out that the market value of the farm is only $55,000. A:

Accepted Answer

A contract is considered valid if it meets the criteria of offer, acceptance, consideration, and mutual consent. The fact that A later discovers the farm is worth less than the agreed price does not invalidate the contract or its terms.

Question 2

The doctrine that prevents an injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promisor's promise is:

Accepted Answer

The doctrine that prevents an injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promisor's promise is known as detrimental reliance. This means that if a person has made a promise to someone else, and the person who relied on the promise suffered a loss as a result of that promise being broken, then the court may require the promisor to compensate the promisee for the loss.

Question 3

The doctrine that prevents an injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promisor's promise is:

Accepted Answer

The correct term for the doctrine described is "promissory estoppel," which is not listed among the options provided. Promissory estoppel prevents an injustice by allowing a party to recover on a promise made when they have reasonably relied on that promise to their detriment, even if a formal contract does not exist. None of the choices given accurately describe this legal principle.

Question 4

Which of the following is usually not a requirement for a contract to be valid?

Accepted Answer

While it is generally recommended that a contract involve an exchange of equal value, this is not always a legal requirement for a contract to be valid. The other options listed (offer and acceptance, contractual capacity, and legality of purpose) are generally required for a contract to be considered valid.

Question 5

Which of the following is usually not a requirement for a contract to be valid?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Which of the following is usually not...

Question 6

In Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace, the employer told the employees that as a condition of continued employment they had to agree to a new dispute resolution policy that would take effect in two weeks. Caley sued, contending the new policy was not backed by consideration, so there was no enforceable contract. The appeals court held that:

Accepted Answer

The appeals court held that continued employment was a valid form of consideration, so the employees agreeing to the new dispute resolution policy as a condition of continued employment created an enforceable contract.

Question 7

Under some circumstances, courts do not require consideration for a promise to be enforced. The doctrine used by the courts to bind a promisor is called detrimental reliance or:

Accepted Answer

The doctrine used by courts to enforce a promise without consideration is promissory estoppel, also known as detrimental reliance. This occurs when one party makes a promise to another party, who then relies on that promise to their detriment. The courts may enforce the promise in order to prevent an injustice from occurring. Restitution refers to the return of something that was taken wrongfully, and revocation refers to the cancellation or withdrawal of an offer. Therefore, neither option A nor C is correct.

Question 8

Uncle Jim tells his niece as she goes off to Creepy U. that if she maintains a 3.5 average that he will buy her a BMW convertible when she graduates. At graduation she has a 3.7 GPA and so she wants the BMW convertible. Uncle Jim says that he doesn't have to give her the BMW convertible because what she did was for her own good. Niece wants to sue Uncle Jim to get the BMW convertible. There probably is:

Accepted Answer

Uncle Jim's promise of a BMW convertible in exchange for maintaining a 3.5 GPA constitutes a valid contract based on the principle of consideration, where the niece's action of achieving the GPA is the consideration for Uncle Jim's promise.

Question 9

In Hinson v. N&W Construction, where Hinson submitted the low bid to N&W for plumbing work to be part of a larger construction project by N&W, but then refused to do the work when construction was started by N&W, the court held that Hinson's bid:

Accepted Answer

The court held that Hinson's bid created liability based on promissory estoppel, making him liable for the extra costs incurred by N&W to find a replacement. This is because N&W reasonably relied on Hinson's bid in their planning and budgeting for the project.

Question 10

A offers B $100,000 for his farm, and they sign an agreement for the sale. Before the money is paid, A finds out that the market value of the farm is only $55,000. A:

Accepted Answer

A contract, once signed, is binding unless there are specific legal grounds for invalidation. A mistake in the valuation of the property (market value) does not automatically void the contract or necessitate a price adjustment unless it can be proven that there was fraud, misrepresentation, or mutual mistake regarding a fundamental aspect of the contract. None of these conditions are specified in the given scenario.

Question 11

Uncle Jim tells his niece as she goes off to Creepy U. that if she maintains a 3.5 average that he will buy her a BMW convertible when she graduates. At graduation she has a 3.7 GPA and so she wants the BMW convertible. Uncle Jim says that he doesn't have to give her the BMW convertible because what she did was for her own good. Niece wants to sue Uncle Jim to get the BMW convertible. There probably is:

Accepted Answer

The statement made by Uncle Jim can be seen as a unilateral contract, where he promised a specific reward (the BMW convertible) for a specific action (maintaining a 3.5 GPA). The niece fulfilled her part of the condition by achieving a 3.7 GPA, thus she could argue that Uncle Jim is obligated to fulfill his promise. The reasons provided in the other choices do not apply to the situation described.

Question 12

A doctrine to avoid injustice that is used by the courts to bind a promisor to promises that a reasonable person would rely upon without consideration, is called:

Accepted Answer

The correct term for the doctrine described is "promissory estoppel," which is not listed among the provided options. Promissory estoppel prevents a promisor from arguing that an underlying promise should not be legally upheld or enforced due to the lack of consideration, when the promisee has relied on that promise to their detriment. None of the choices given (settlement agreement, accord and satisfaction, unliquidated debt, performance contract) accurately describe this legal doctrine.

Question 13

In Hinson v. N&W Construction, where Hinson submitted the low bid to N&W for plumbing work to be part of a larger construction project by N&W, but then refused to do the work when construction was started by N&W, the court held that Hinson's bid:

Accepted Answer

The answer of In Hinson v. N&W Construction, where Hinson...

Question 14

The doctrine that prevents an injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promisor's promise is:

Accepted Answer

Promissory estoppel is a doctrine that prevents an injustice when a party has reasonably relied on another party's promise. This means that if a promisor makes a promise, and the promisee relies on that promise to their detriment, the promisor may be estopped (prevented) from reneging on the promise. This doctrine also requires that the promise be clear and definite, that the promisee has reasonably relied on the promise, and that enforcement of the promise is necessary to avoid an injustice. None of the other answer choices accurately describe this doctrine.

Question 15

In Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace, the employer told the employees that as a condition of continued employment they had to agree to a new dispute resolution policy that would take effect in two weeks. Caley sued, contending the new policy was not backed by consideration, so there was no enforceable contract. The appeals court held that:

Accepted Answer

The appeals court likely found that the new dispute resolution policy constituted a modification of the employment contract, which was supported by consideration. In employment law, continued employment can serve as consideration for new terms in an employment contract, making the new dispute resolution policy enforceable.

Question 16

Twenty years after you leave college you are rich and famous. Your college calls on you for a $10 million gift to renovate a classroom building and name the building in your honor. You tell them you will be glad to give the gift because you learned so much and that is why you are successful. A year later the building is renovated and the college asks for the money. You decide to spend it on a new jet and tell the college to get stuffed. You:

Accepted Answer

This scenario involves the concept of promissory estoppel, which states that even if a promise is not in writing and does not create a binding contract, it can still be enforced if one party relies on it to their detriment. In this case, the college relied on the promise of a $10 million gift to renovate the classroom building and name it after the person. If that person reneges on the promise and spends the money elsewhere, it would be a breach of the promise, and the college could seek legal action to hold them accountable. The person would have to pay the money under the rule of promissory estoppel, which prevents them from unfairly benefiting from the broken promise.

Question 17

In Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace, the employer told the employees that as a condition of continued employment they had to agree to a new dispute resolution policy that would take effect in two weeks. Caley sued, contending the new policy was not backed by consideration, so there was no enforceable contract. The appeals court held that:

Accepted Answer

The court held that continued employment was sufficient consideration for the new dispute resolution policy, making it an enforceable contract.

Question 18

A doctrine to avoid injustice that is used by the courts to bind a promisor to promises that a reasonable person would rely upon without consideration, is called:

Accepted Answer

Promissory estoppel is a doctrine that is used by the courts to bind a promisor to promises that a reasonable person would rely upon without consideration. It is a legal principle that prevents a person from denying a promise or statement made that another person relied on and acted upon. This principle is used to avoid injustice in situations where there is no enforceable contract due to lack of consideration or other factors.

Question 19

Twenty years after you leave college you are rich and famous. Your college calls on you for a $5 million gift to renovate a classroom building and name the building in your honor. You tell them you will be glad to give the gift because you learned so much and that is why you are successful. A year later the building is renovated and the college asks for the money. You decide to spend it on a new jet and tell the college to get stuffed. You:

Accepted Answer

This scenario involves a promise of a gift, which generally does not create a legally binding contract unless certain conditions are met, such as reliance on the promise to the detriment of the promisee. The correct answer depends on specific legal principles and facts not fully detailed here, such as whether the college relied on the promise to their detriment or if there was any form of written agreement. However, none of the provided choices accurately capture the complexity of potential legal obligations in such scenarios, making E the most appropriate choice.

Question 20

In Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace, the employer told the employees that as a condition of continued employment they had to agree to a new dispute resolution policy that would take effect in two weeks. Caley sued, contending the new policy was not backed by consideration, so there was no enforceable contract. The appeals court held that:

Accepted Answer

The appeals court held that there was an offer (the new dispute resolution policy), acceptance (the employees' agreement to the policy as a condition of continued employment), and consideration (continued employment in exchange for agreeing to the new policy), thus constituting a valid contract.

Quiz 10: Contracts

A offers B $100,000 for his farm, and they sign an agreement for the sale. Before the money is paid, A finds out that the market value of the farm is only $55,000. A:

The doctrine that prevents an injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promisor's promise is:

The doctrine that prevents an injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promisor's promise is:

Which of the following is usually not a requirement for a contract to be valid?

Which of the following is usually not a requirement for a contract to be valid?

Under some circumstances, courts do not require consideration for a promise to be enforced. The doctrine used by the courts to bind a promisor is called detrimental reliance or:

In Hinson v. N&W Construction, where Hinson submitted the low bid to N&W for plumbing work to be part of a larger construction project by N&W, but then refused to do the work when construction was started by N&W, the court held that Hinson's bid:

A offers B $100,000 for his farm, and they sign an agreement for the sale. Before the money is paid, A finds out that the market value of the farm is only $55,000. A:

A doctrine to avoid injustice that is used by the courts to bind a promisor to promises that a reasonable person would rely upon without consideration, is called:

In Hinson v. N&W Construction, where Hinson submitted the low bid to N&W for plumbing work to be part of a larger construction project by N&W, but then refused to do the work when construction was started by N&W, the court held that Hinson's bid:

The doctrine that prevents an injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promisor's promise is:

A doctrine to avoid injustice that is used by the courts to bind a promisor to promises that a reasonable person would rely upon without consideration, is called: