In World of Boxing LLC v.King,the case in the text,the court held that:
A)impossibility excused King's breach because his mistaken belief was reasonable.
B)impossibility excused King's breach because he should not be punished for failing to foresee a plainly remote and unlikely event.
C)impossibility did not excuse King's breach.
D)impossibility excused King's breach because his duty to perform was triggered by an event out of his control.

Question

In World of Boxing LLC v.King,the case in the text,the court held that:
A)impossibility excused King's breach because his mistaken belief was reasonable.
B)impossibility excused King's breach because he should not be punished for failing to foresee a plainly remote and unlikely event.
C)impossibility did not excuse King's breach.
D)impossibility  excused King's breach because his duty to perform was triggered by an event out of his control.

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The court held that King could not use the doctrine of impossibility to excuse his breach.Instead,it suggested King should have bargained for more protective contract terms.

In World of Boxing LLC V