What was the result in Meyer v.Christie,the case in the text involving whether an agreement to enter into a joint venture existed?
A)That no joint venture existed because there was evidence contrary to the intent to form a joint venture.
B)That while a joint venture existed,no damages were found.
C)That a joint venture existed with no prohibition against damages.
D)That the evidence showed only an anticipatory agreement to form a joint venture in the future,not the actual formation of a joint venture.
E)That any alleged joint venture agreement was unenforceable under the statute of frauds because it was premised upon an unenforceable oral agreement to purchase and transfer land.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)The court ruled that the jury was presented with ample evidence from which it could reasonably conclude that the parties actually entered into a joint venture agreement,that the existence of contrary evidence did not undermine the jury's findings,and that the statute of frauds did not bar the action.
B)The court ruled that the jury was presented with ample evidence from which it could reasonably conclude that the parties actually entered into a joint venture agreement,that the existence of contrary evidence did not undermine the jury's findings,and that the statute of frauds did not bar the action.
C)The court ruled that the jury was presented with ample evidence from which it could reasonably conclude that the parties actually entered into a joint venture agreement,that the existence of contrary evidence did not undermine the jury's findings,and that the statute of frauds did not bar the action.
D)The court ruled that the jury was presented with ample evidence from which it could reasonably conclude that the parties actually entered into a joint venture agreement,that the existence of contrary evidence did not undermine the jury's findings,and that the statute of frauds did not bar the action.
E)The court ruled that the jury was presented with ample evidence from which it could reasonably conclude that the parties actually entered into a joint venture agreement,that the existence of contrary evidence did not undermine the jury's findings,and that the statute of frauds did not bar the action.

What Was the Result in Meyer V