Filters
Question type

Study Flashcards

All states except ________ and ________ adhere to the admission exception to the statute of frauds.


A) New York and California
B) Texas and Oklahoma
C) Louisiana and Georgia
D) California and Louisiana
E) Florida and California

F) A) and B)
G) B) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

What did the appellate court rule in the case in the text, Power Entertainment, Inc., et. al. v. National Football League Properties, Inc., involving the enforceability of an alleged oral agreement by which the plaintiff assumed a third party's debt owed to the defendant in return for the defendant transferring a licensing agreement to the plaintiff?


A) That the plaintiff was barred from recovery by the suretyship provision of the statute of frauds.
B) That the plaintiff could recover because the original agreement between the third party and the defendant was in writing.
C) That the oral agreement fell outside the statute of frauds if the plaintiff satisfied the main purpose doctrine.
D) That the oral agreement fell outside the statute of frauds if the plaintiff satisfied the parol evidence rule.
E) That the plaintiff could recover as a matter of law because the statute of frauds does not apply to suretyship agreements.

F) A) and B)
G) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

[Not So Rich Uncle] Gabriel is attempting to convince Rachel to marry him. He promises her that if she will marry him, he will buy a new Mercedes automobile for her within six months of the marriage and take her on a world tour within a year of the marriage date. Rachel agrees, and they sign an agreement by which Gabriel agrees to provide the Mercedes and world tour. The agreement also included several clauses that discussed the distribution of other assets that may be acquired during the marriage in the event a dissolution of the marriage ever happened. Gabriel and Rachel marry on January 1. Unexpectedly, on March 1, Gabriel's supposedly rich uncle, Leo, dies. Leo has no living relatives other than Gabriel and has a will leaving everything to Gabriel who is also appointed executor. In attempting to settle the estate, Gabriel agrees orally to pay out of his own pocket debts of Leo totaling $10,000. Rachel is concerned about Gabriel's doing so. Gabriel tells her not to worry because he will get all the money back when the estate settles. Gabriel admits to a number of friends that he agreed to settle the debts out of his own pocket because he needed to obtain assets from the estate in a hurry and did not want anything to slow down probate. The assets were needed in large part to satisfy his obligations to Rachel. Surprisingly, it later came to light that prior to his death Leo had signed away all his assets to his girlfriend in Argentina. There was nothing left in the estate for Gabriel to inherit. Gabriel disavowed his agreement to pay the $10,000 to various creditors of Leo. -The agreement between Gabriel and Rachel before they married is known as a(n) :


A) Prenuptial agreement
B) Dissolution of marriage contract
C) Premarriage agreement
D) Agreement of marriage
E) Memorandum of marriage

F) A) and B)
G) B) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

[Kids' debts] Marta agrees to buy Natasha's convertible, but Marta may be losing her job, in which case, her mother Lottie will pay pursuant to the terms of the contract Lottie signed. Jeb signs an agreement to pay for his son Byron's plastic surgery, if his son cannot afford the payments. Lucia agrees to sell her drumset to Marcus because Marcus' father said he will back the deal. -Which individuals would be considered to have secondary obligations?


A) Marta, Byron, and Marcus.
B) Natasha, Jeb, and Lucia.
C) Natasha's father, Byron, and Marcus' father.
D) Lottie, Jeb, and Marcus' father.
E) Lottie, Byron, and Marcus' father.

F) A) and D)
G) C) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Under which of the following circumstances would a partial-performance exception not apply?


A) Sale of a farm, but not the entire property.
B) Sale of a house, where the buyer has put down a 5% deposit.
C) Sale of a farm, where the buyer has paid for a new roof.
D) Sale of a house, where the seller gave keys to the buyer and the buyer has moved several large pieces of furniture into the garage.
E) Sale of a house, where the buyer has planted several trees before winter.

F) A) and B)
G) A) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

As discussed in the text, a main purpose of the ________ is to prevent unreliable oral evidence from interfering with a contractual relationship.


A) hearsay rule
B) statute of frauds
C) contractual relationship rules
D) rules against frauds
E) inclusivity rule

F) None of the above
G) C) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Written contracts intended to be the complete and final representation of the parties' agreement are what kind of contracts?


A) Complete contracts
B) Integrated contracts
C) Adhesion contracts
D) Bilateral contracts
E) Acknowledged contracts

F) A) and D)
G) B) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Merger clauses are considered by all courts to be conclusive proof of a contract.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Contracts related to an interest in land are within the scope of the statute of frauds and are to be evidenced by a writing.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Kendra owns a sporting goods store. She is in court because of a breach of contract lawsuit against her supplier. One of the terms of the contract is ambiguous. Would the court likely permit Kendra to testify as to oral conversations about the ambiguous terms of the contract?


A) Yes, but only to clarify the ambiguous contract terms.
B) No, because there is a written contract.
C) No, but she could provide additional writings.
D) No, because it would modify the contract.
E) Yes, where ambiguous terms exist, she may provide oral evidence that modifies the contract.

F) A) and B)
G) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Jacob has insurance with Big Insurer. Jacob has a wreck with Selena. The adjuster for Big Insurer orally agrees to pay Selena $1,000 for the damage to her car. The adjuster, however, gets in trouble with his boss for agreeing to pay too much. He tells Selena that he is backing out of the deal because the agreement is unenforceable on the basis that the statute of frauds requires that a contract to pay the debt of another be in writing. Is the adjuster correct? Why or why not?

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

The adjuster is not correct. The insurer...

View Answer

[Not So Rich Uncle] Gabriel is attempting to convince Rachel to marry him. He promises her that if she will marry him, he will buy a new Mercedes automobile for her within six months of the marriage and take her on a world tour within a year of the marriage date. Rachel agrees, and they sign an agreement by which Gabriel agrees to provide the Mercedes and world tour. The agreement also included several clauses that discussed the distribution of other assets that may be acquired during the marriage in the event a dissolution of the marriage ever happened. Gabriel and Rachel marry on January 1. Unexpectedly, on March 1, Gabriel's supposedly rich uncle, Leo, dies. Leo has no living relatives other than Gabriel and has a will leaving everything to Gabriel who is also appointed executor. In attempting to settle the estate, Gabriel agrees orally to pay out of his own pocket debts of Leo totaling $10,000. Rachel is concerned about Gabriel's doing so. Gabriel tells her not to worry because he will get all the money back when the estate settles. Gabriel admits to a number of friends that he agreed to settle the debts out of his own pocket because he needed to obtain assets from the estate in a hurry and did not want anything to slow down probate. The assets were needed in large part to satisfy his obligations to Rachel. Surprisingly, it later came to light that prior to his death Leo had signed away all his assets to his girlfriend in Argentina. There was nothing left in the estate for Gabriel to inherit. Gabriel disavowed his agreement to pay the $10,000 to various creditors of Leo. -What is the most likely result of Gabriel's attempt to avoid his agreement to pay creditors of the estate out of his own pocket?


A) He will be able to avoid the agreement because it was not in writing.
B) He will be able to avoid the agreement because a promise to pay the debts of an estate would not come within the statute of frauds.
C) A promise to pay debts of an estate out of an executor's own funds would come within the statute of frauds, but the oral agreement Gabriel made will likely be enforceable under the substantial-purpose rule.
D) A promise to pay debts of an estate out of an executor's own funds would come within the statute of frauds, but the oral agreement Gabriel made will likely be enforceable under the main-purpose rule.
E) A promise to pay debts of an estate out of an executor's own funds would come within the statute of frauds; but regardless of whether the creditors can establish reliance, the oral agreement Gabriel made will likely be enforceable because he admitted he had agreed to pay.

F) A) and D)
G) A) and B)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Whenever a written agreement under the statute of frauds contains a serious, and obvious, typographical error, parol evidence is admissible to demonstrate that the error was indeed an error, as well as to set forth the proper term.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

[Not So Rich Uncle] Gabriel is attempting to convince Rachel to marry him. He promises her that if she will marry him, he will buy a new Mercedes automobile for her within six months of the marriage and take her on a world tour within a year of the marriage date. Rachel agrees, and they sign an agreement by which Gabriel agrees to provide the Mercedes and world tour. The agreement also included several clauses that discussed the distribution of other assets that may be acquired during the marriage in the event a dissolution of the marriage ever happened. Gabriel and Rachel marry on January 1. Unexpectedly, on March 1, Gabriel's supposedly rich uncle, Leo, dies. Leo has no living relatives other than Gabriel and has a will leaving everything to Gabriel who is also appointed executor. In attempting to settle the estate, Gabriel agrees orally to pay out of his own pocket debts of Leo totaling $10,000. Rachel is concerned about Gabriel's doing so. Gabriel tells her not to worry because he will get all the money back when the estate settles. Gabriel admits to a number of friends that he agreed to settle the debts out of his own pocket because he needed to obtain assets from the estate in a hurry and did not want anything to slow down probate. The assets were needed in large part to satisfy his obligations to Rachel. Surprisingly, it later came to light that prior to his death Leo had signed away all his assets to his girlfriend in Argentina. There was nothing left in the estate for Gabriel to inherit. Gabriel disavowed his agreement to pay the $10,000 to various creditors of Leo. -Regarding Gabriel's promises to Rachel of a Mercedes and a trip, which of the following is true?


A) The promises fall within the statute of frauds.
B) The promises do not fall within the statute of frauds because they involve material matters, not matters involving home and children.
C) The promises do not fall within the statute of frauds unless Rachel can prove that she would not have married Gabriel without the assurance of the Mercedes and the trip.
D) The promises fall within the statute of frauds unless Gabriel can prove that Rachel would have married him without the assurance of the Mercedes and the trip.
E) The promises would have fallen within the statute of frauds in earlier times in history, but would not fall within the statute of frauds in this day and time.

F) C) and E)
G) A) and B)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

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.

F) B) and E)
G) B) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Which of the following is false regarding the parol evidence rule?


A) The purpose of the rule is to prevent evidence that substantially contradicts an agreement in its written form.
B) The rule is a rule of evidence.
C) The rule relates to substantive legal issues.
D) The rule is not a unitary concept or rule.
E) The rule is an amalgamation of different rules and conditions.

F) C) and D)
G) A) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

What are the eight exceptions to the parol evidence rule?

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

The exceptions are (1) contracts that ha...

View Answer

Define the term "admission" in relation to contracts under the statute of frauds. Discuss the pros and cons of the rule on admissions, and whether you think courts should recognize admissions.

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

An admission is a statement made in cour...

View Answer

Lima called Mark and asked him to build her another custom dresser for her house like one he had previously built. Lima decided she didn't want it after Mark tried to deliver it. She tells Mark they have no contract. Is she correct?


A) Yes, oral contracts for customized goods are enforceable.
B) Yes, but only if Mark can prove the phone call was placed by Lima.
C) Yes, but only if parol evidence can be used to show the parties intent.
D) No, all contracts must be in writing.
E) No, oral contracts are not legal.

F) A) and E)
G) B) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Truduea and Melania have negotiated an agreement to buy computer parts for Melania's business. In order to satisfy the UCC's writing requirements, what must be included in their written agreement?


A) The contract or memorandum needs only to state the price of the goods.
B) The contract or memorandum needs only to state the quality of the goods.
C) The contract or memorandum needs only to state the quantity to be sold.
D) The contract or memorandum needs to state the price of the goods and the quality of the goods, but not the quantity to be sold.
E) The contract or memorandum needs to state the price of the goods, the quality of the goods, and also the quantity to be sold.

F) B) and E)
G) A) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Showing 41 - 60 of 90

Related Exams

Show Answer