Question

Question 152 pts

Matt promised to pay Cameron $5,000 ''in appreciation for his eight years of past employment." Matt later changed his mind and refused to pay Cameron the money. Cameron sues Matt. Who should win?

Group of answer choices

Matt, because the facts reveal neither consideration for his promise nor a basis for promissory estoppel.

Cameron, because his eight years of service to Matt is consideration for Matt' s promise.

Cameron, because Matt's promise was in writing.

Matt, because Cameron did not act in good faith when he sued Matt.

Flag this Question

Question 162 pts

Which of the following statements regarding "legal value'' is false?

Group of answer choices

It cannot be satisfied by a promise.

It may be satisfied by an act.

It does not require that consideration have monetary value.

It cannot be satisfied by the performance of a preexisting debt.

Flag this Question

Question 172 pts

In a contract between Ozzy (a retailer) and Zack (a manufacturer of rubber bats), Zack gave Ozzy the sole right to distribute its bats. Which of the following statements is true?

Group of answer choices

Regardless of whether the agreement specifically says so, Zack must use its best efforts to keep Ozzy adequately supplied with bats.

The agreement is a Firm offer contract.

The contract is illusory because of the indefinite stated number of rubber bats.

If Ozzy later makes absolutely no effort to sell Zack's bats, Ozzy will still not have violated the contract.

Flag this Question

Question 182 pts

On May 1, Ricky agrees to install a concrete driveway at Lucy's house by May 30, in exchange for Lucy's promise to pay $2,300 upon completion of the work. Which of the following statements is true?

Group of answer choices

Both Lucy and Ricky have given consideration for the other's promise; therefore, neither can refuse to perform without breaching the contract.

If Lucy later learns that other companies would have done the job for slightly less, she can cancel the contract based on inadequate consideration.

Lucy can hire someone else to do the job without any liability to Ricky if Ricky hasn't completed the job, because until then Ricky has not given any consideration for Lucy's promise.

Ricky can break his contract with Lucy to accept a better paying job because Lucy has not given consideration for Ricky’s promise to install the driveway until she pays the $2,300.

Answer 1

Question 1: Answer - Option a

Explanation:

The question hasn't explicitly mentioned anything given in writing, which means there ain't no evidence which shows the consideration of the promise. It was out of goodwill that Matt was willing to offer money to Cameron. Hence Matt will win the case

Question 2: Answer - Option d

Explanation:

The legal value means the significance of documents in protecting the rights of individuals or the organization. Keeping this in mind it's evident that the first 3 options are relevant and the last option is not very appealing to the context

Question 3: Option d

Explanation:

You must understand that the question hasn't provided us with any further details apart from just a contract being signed between the parties. It just has an agreement on the sole rights for distribution being transferred to Ozzy, which essentially means that it is Ozzy's headache to distribute Zack's bats either it be 0 or 100 or 10000. The number of bats doesn't matter as the contract doesn't mention explicitly and neither it is a firm offer contract (this contract remains for a certain period of time after which it can't be revoked). Just going by the contract signed, there is no mention of any minimum number of bats to be sold. Hence , by this time you might have figured out why the last option is correct.

Question 4: Option c

Explanation:

The contract clearly says that Lucy is liable to pay Ricky only if Ricky completes his job. So, if the job isn't completed, Ricky hasn't given consideration to the promise. Hence Lucy is free to hire someone else for the job.

Hope this helps. Do hit the thumbs up. Cheers!