Which of the following was the result in the Case Nugget in the text involving the dispute between Dr. Ralph M. Aurigemma and New Castle Care, LLC, involving whether an oral agreement entered into on September 4 involving Dr. Aurigemma serving as medical director from October 1 of that year until October 1 of the next year was enforceable?
A) That the contract was enforceable because agreements for professional services do not come within the protection of the statute of frauds.
B) That the contract was enforceable because of the partial-performance exception to the statute of frauds.
C) That the contract was not in writing and, therefore, could not be enforced.
D) That the contract could not be enforced because of the parol evidence rule.
E) That the contract could be enforced because of the parol evidence rule.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q12: The purpose of the parol evidence rule
Q13: "Statute of Frauds" is a title in
Q14: What did the appellate court rule in
Q15: All parties to a contract must sign
Q16: An oral contract for customized goods is
Q18: Merger clauses are considered by all courts
Q19: Parol evidence is admissible when a court
Q20: Which of the following is false regarding
Q21: Which statement is false regarding the statute
Q22: Melinda signs a three year contract for
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