Ellis agreed to paint Lee's house for a price of $1,500. A month before the performance was due, Lee called and told Ellis that she had changed her mind and was going to have her house restuccoed instead. Ellis insisted that they had a contract and that he was going to paint the house anyway. Lee repeated that she was not going to go through with it, but Ellis insisted the contract was still on. Before further steps could be taken by either party, Lee's house was destroyed by a freak airplane accident. Which one of the following statements describes the law applicable to these facts?
A) Lee could have accepted Ellis's conduct as an anticipatory breach.
B) Ellis's conduct amounted to repudiation, and Lee could have sued for breach of contract immediately after the phone call.
C) The contract has been discharged by frustration.
D) Lee's conduct did not amount to a breach since she told him a month before performance was due that she didn't want the house painted.
E) Ellis will be able to successfully claim as damages the amount that he would have made if the contract had been performed.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q6: Which of the following statements is correct
Q7: On the February 1, Smyth contracted to
Q8: Which of the following is true with
Q9: Gill, a wholesale fish seller, agreed to
Q10: Which of the following is true with
Q12: Which of the following is true with
Q13: When an anticipatory breach has taken place
Q14: Smedlap, a trucker, and Dewdney, a farmer,
Q15: A contract is terminated by agreement in
Q16: In all but one of the following
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