Question 1

A promise to pay a debt that has already been discharged in bankruptcy must be in writing in order to be enforceable in some states.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False  True

Question 2

William and Katherine are planning to get married. William's attorney indicated the parties should sign an agreement before the two get married that clearly states the ownership rights each party enjoys in the other party's property. This is known as a(n) ________.

Accepted Answer

A)  Premarriage Contract 
B)  Property Marriage Agreement 
C)  Marriage Contract 
D)  Prenuptial Agreement 
E)  Arranged Marriage Agreement 
A)  Premarriage Contract 
B)  Property Marriage Agreement 
C)  Marriage Contract 
D)  Prenuptial Agreement 
E)  Arranged Marriage Agreement D

Question 3

Alvin promised Gia that if she quit her job in California and moved to New York, he would have a job for her. Gia sells everything and moves to New York. Alvin however does not hire Gia to work. Under which of the following circumstances would promissory estoppel take effect?

Accepted Answer

A)  Gia relied on Alvin's promise to her detriment and Alvin should have known Gia would rely on it. 
B)  Gia relied on Alvin's promise to her detriment. 
C)  Gia's reliance on Alvin's promise was foreseeable. 
D)  Alvin knew Gia would rely on his promise. 
E)  Gia relied on Alvin's promise which Alvin knew she would do. 
A)  Gia relied on Alvin's promise to her detriment and Alvin should have known Gia would rely on it. 
B)  Gia relied on Alvin's promise to her detriment. 
C)  Gia's reliance on Alvin's promise was foreseeable. 
D)  Alvin knew Gia would rely on his promise. 
E)  Gia relied on Alvin's promise which Alvin knew she would do. A

Question 4

[Courtroom Surprises] Alexandra agrees to sell Rishi her house for $200,000. Alexandra, Rishi, and the house are all located in Tennessee. She also orally agrees to sell her used car to Rishi for $1,000. Alexandra and Rishi discuss the fact that the house needs some repairs. Alexandra gives Rishi a key and tells him to do whatever he wants with the house. In reliance on her promise to sell the house, Rishi sells his home, gets a loan, and has a new roof put on Alexandra's house because of leaks that needed to be repaired to prevent further damage. When presented with the written agreements of sale for the home and the car, however, Alexandra refuses to sign either. Rishi sues, and the case proceeds to trial. Alexandra tells the judge in court under oath that she orally agreed to sell the house but that she changed her mind before signing and that she believes she has protection under the statute of frauds. She tells the judge that no agreement was ever made regarding the car and that she also has protection under the statute of frauds regarding that matter.
-Regarding Rishi getting a loan and putting a new roof on the house, which of the following is true?

Accepted Answer

A)  Rishi should have known better, and his actions would be of no use to him in attempting to enforce the contract. 
B)  The judge would consider his actions under the UCC as exceptions to the parol evidence rule. 
C)  His actions would likely amount to promissory estoppel, which establishes an exception to the statute of frauds. 
D)  His actions would be considered as admissions. 
E)  His actions would be considered only because Alexandra told the judge that she had orally agreed to the contract. 
A)  Rishi should have known better, and his actions would be of no use to him in attempting to enforce the contract. 
B)  The judge would consider his actions under the UCC as exceptions to the parol evidence rule. 
C)  His actions would likely amount to promissory estoppel, which establishes an exception to the statute of frauds. 
D)  His actions would be considered as admissions. 
E)  His actions would be considered only because Alexandra told the judge that she had orally agreed to the contract.

Question 5

Within the ________, "land" encompasses not only the land and soil itself but anything attached to the land.

Accepted Answer

A)  parol evidence rule 
B)  statute of frauds 
C)  common law rules governing land 
D)  land contracts rule 
E)  the rule of promissory estoppel 
A)  parol evidence rule 
B)  statute of frauds 
C)  common law rules governing land 
D)  land contracts rule 
E)  the rule of promissory estoppel

Question 6

What was the result in Heritage Constructors, Inc. v. Chrietzberg Electric, Inc., and Richard Marc Chrietzberg, the case in the text in which the plaintiff, a general contractor, filed a breach of contract action against the defendant, an electrical subcontractor that withdrew its bid right before the contract was to be performed? The defendant claimed the agreement did not satisfy the statute of frauds and that the general contractor's breach of contract claim was barred.

Accepted Answer

A)  Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed because, although none of the writings mention the plaintiff, oral testimony was admissible to supply an essential term of the agreement. 
B)  Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed because the writings along with oral testimony were sufficient to satisfy the status of frauds. 
C)  The plaintiff's claim was dismissed because none of the writings mention the plaintiff or identify the plaintiff as a party to the contract, and oral testimony was necessary to supply an essential term of the agreement, and thus they are insufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds. 
D)  The plaintiff's claim was dismissed because the oral agreement was unenforceable because there was no writing. 
E)  Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed since no writing was required because the agreement did not come within the statute of frauds. 
A)  Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed because, although none of the writings mention the plaintiff, oral testimony was admissible to supply an essential term of the agreement. 
B)  Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed because the writings along with oral testimony were sufficient to satisfy the status of frauds. 
C)  The plaintiff's claim was dismissed because none of the writings mention the plaintiff or identify the plaintiff as a party to the contract, and oral testimony was necessary to supply an essential term of the agreement, and thus they are insufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds. 
D)  The plaintiff's claim was dismissed because the oral agreement was unenforceable because there was no writing. 
E)  Judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed since no writing was required because the agreement did not come within the statute of frauds.

Question 7

In which circumstance may a court find parol evidence admissible to further the court's understanding of an agreement?

Accepted Answer

A)  When a court determines that there is significant disagreement regarding the complete and final version of the agreement. 
B)  When a court determines that a written agreement does not represent a complete and final version of the agreement. 
C)  When a court determines that there is disagreement between the parties' over performance of the agreement once performance has actually started. 
D)  When a court determines that the plaintiff failed to do sufficient research to determine if signing the agreement was advisable. 
E)  When a court determines that either party failed to do sufficient research to determine if signing the agreement was advisable. 
A)  When a court determines that there is significant disagreement regarding the complete and final version of the agreement. 
B)  When a court determines that a written agreement does not represent a complete and final version of the agreement. 
C)  When a court determines that there is disagreement between the parties' over performance of the agreement once performance has actually started. 
D)  When a court determines that the plaintiff failed to do sufficient research to determine if signing the agreement was advisable. 
E)  When a court determines that either party failed to do sufficient research to determine if signing the agreement was advisable.

Question 8

Which of the following is a type of contract that does not fall within the scope of the statute of frauds?

Accepted Answer

A)  Contracts related to an interest in land 
B)  Promises made in consideration of marriage 
C)  Contracts related to any lease of land-related equipment 
D)  Contracts whose terms prevent possible performance within one year 
E)  Contracts for one party to pay the debt of another if the initial party fails to pay 
A)  Contracts related to an interest in land 
B)  Promises made in consideration of marriage 
C)  Contracts related to any lease of land-related equipment 
D)  Contracts whose terms prevent possible performance within one year 
E)  Contracts for one party to pay the debt of another if the initial party fails to pay

Question 9

Which of the following is true regarding a signature on a document falling within the statute of frauds?

Accepted Answer

A)  There is no requirement of any signature of either party to satisfy the statute of frauds. 
B)  Any party required to sign must sign at the beginning of the document. 
C)  Any party required to sign must sign at the end of the document. 
D)  Any party required to sign must sign both at the end and at the beginning of the document. 
E)  So long as it is meant as a signature, a party required to sign may sign at any place on the document. 
A)  There is no requirement of any signature of either party to satisfy the statute of frauds. 
B)  Any party required to sign must sign at the beginning of the document. 
C)  Any party required to sign must sign at the end of the document. 
D)  Any party required to sign must sign both at the end and at the beginning of the document. 
E)  So long as it is meant as a signature, a party required to sign may sign at any place on the document.

Question 10

Gianni hires Dolton to work as his driver with an annual salary of $100,000 for the rest of Dolton's life. After two years, Gianni decides to fire Dolton. Dolton claims they have a valid contract, but Gianni says it is barred by the statute of frauds because they never put anything in writing. Who is correct?

Accepted Answer

A)  Gianni, because the contract cannot be completed in one year. 
B)  Dolton, because the contract can be completed in one year because Dolton could die within a year of the contract's creation. 
C)  Gianni, because Dolton did not die during the year after the contract's creation. 
D)  Gianni, because Gianni did not sign any agreement and he is the party being charged. 
E)  Dolton because, even though the contract was not completed within one year, public policy does not support lifetime employment contracts that are not in writing. 
A)  Gianni, because the contract cannot be completed in one year. 
B)  Dolton, because the contract can be completed in one year because Dolton could die within a year of the contract's creation. 
C)  Gianni, because Dolton did not die during the year after the contract's creation. 
D)  Gianni, because Gianni did not sign any agreement and he is the party being charged. 
E)  Dolton because, even though the contract was not completed within one year, public policy does not support lifetime employment contracts that are not in writing.

Question 11

All parties to a contract must sign the writing in order for the statute of frauds to be satisfied.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 12

Which of the following contracts would fall within the statute of frauds and therefore requires a writing?

Accepted Answer

A)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for one year, starting July 1. 
B)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for one year, starting immediately. 
C)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for one year, starting the next day 
D)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for six months, starting November 1. 
E)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for six months, starting December 15. 
A)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for one year, starting July 1. 
B)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for one year, starting immediately. 
C)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for one year, starting the next day 
D)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for six months, starting November 1. 
E)  On June 15, Luigi hires Vela to work for him for six months, starting December 15.

Question 13

Which statement is false regarding the statute of frauds?

Accepted Answer

A)  It relates to fraudulent contracts. 
B)  It does not address illegal contracts. 
C)  It does not exist at the federal level. 
D)  It requires that only certain contracts be in writing. 
E)  It is not a unitary government act. 
A)  It relates to fraudulent contracts. 
B)  It does not address illegal contracts. 
C)  It does not exist at the federal level. 
D)  It requires that only certain contracts be in writing. 
E)  It is not a unitary government act.

Question 14

[Courtroom Surprises] Alexandra agrees to sell Rishi her house for $200,000. Alexandra, Rishi, and the house are all located in Tennessee. She also orally agrees to sell her used car to Rishi for $1,000. Alexandra and Rishi discuss the fact that the house needs some repairs. Alexandra gives Rishi a key and tells him to do whatever he wants with the house. In reliance on her promise to sell the house, Rishi sells his home, gets a loan, and has a new roof put on Alexandra's house because of leaks that needed to be repaired to prevent further damage. When presented with the written agreements of sale for the home and the car, however, Alexandra refuses to sign either. Rishi sues, and the case proceeds to trial. Alexandra tells the judge in court under oath that she orally agreed to sell the house but that she changed her mind before signing and that she believes she has protection under the statute of frauds. She tells the judge that no agreement was ever made regarding the car and that she also has protection under the statute of frauds regarding that matter.
-Regarding Alexandra's statement to the judge that the agreement to sell the car was covered by the statute of frauds, which of the following is true?

Accepted Answer

A)  She was correct. 
B)  She was incorrect because while the UCC has a provision regarding writings for the sale of certain goods, that provision is not a part of the statute of frauds. 
C)  She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $1,500. 
D)  She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $2,000. 
E)  She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $5,000. 
A)  She was correct. 
B)  She was incorrect because while the UCC has a provision regarding writings for the sale of certain goods, that provision is not a part of the statute of frauds. 
C)  She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $1,500. 
D)  She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $2,000. 
E)  She was incorrect because the statute of frauds provision involving the sale of goods only applies to goods costing over $5,000.

Question 15

[Lake House] Damian has two houses, a house on the lake and a house in town. Frida wants to buy the house on the lake. Damian and Frida orally agree that Frida will buy the house on the lake for $300,000. Damian hurriedly writes out a contract providing that he would sell "his house" to Frida for $300,000. Damian signs the top of the document. Frida does not sign at all. No merger clause is included in the contract. Damian backs out of the contract, and Frida sues him. He tells the judge that the statute of frauds is left unsatisfied because he did not sign the document at the end and also because Frida did not sign at all. He also tells the judge that, at any rate, the agreement referred to the house in town, not the house on the lake; and that under the parol evidence rule, he had the right to identify the correct house.
-Regarding Damian's assertion that the statute of frauds is not satisfied because Frida did not sign the document, which of the following is true?

Accepted Answer

A)  Damian is correct. 
B)  Damian is incorrect because he is the one being sued, and he signed the document. 
C)  Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the selling price was referenced. 
D)  Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the type of subject matter involved was referenced. 
E)  Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the parties were clearly identified. 
A)  Damian is correct. 
B)  Damian is incorrect because he is the one being sued, and he signed the document. 
C)  Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the selling price was referenced. 
D)  Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the type of subject matter involved was referenced. 
E)  Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the parties were clearly identified.

Question 16

Which of the following is not an exception to the parol evidence rule?

Accepted Answer

A)  Evidence of usage of trade. 
B)  Ambiguous evidence. 
C)  Contracts that have been subsequently modified. 
D)  Contracts based on terms that were agreed on orally. 
E)  Evidence of prior dealings between the parties. 
A)  Evidence of usage of trade. 
B)  Ambiguous evidence. 
C)  Contracts that have been subsequently modified. 
D)  Contracts based on terms that were agreed on orally. 
E)  Evidence of prior dealings between the parties.

Question 17

Nadia, the president of XYZ Co., and Ramon orally agreed that Ramon would work as a computer programmer for XYZ Co. for a three-year period. Their oral agreement also covered other matters such as his pay and the availability of one week of paid vacation. On the day he talked with Nadia, Ramon signed an employee handbook including a provision that his employment was at will, meaning that at any time he could quit or the company could discharge him. A month later, Ramon received a three-year contract for employment with XYZ Co. in the mail incorporating the amount of his salary and other issues he had discussed with Nadia. Ramon signed it and mailed it back, but he changed the vacation provision to three weeks instead of one week. Brendan, the human resources manager for XYZ Co., called Ramon after receiving the agreement and told Ramon that the contract was only a draft for discussion purposes and that he was actually firing Ramon because he seemed too focused on vacation. Assuming the court follows the reasoning of the court in the dispute discussed in the text involving Michael Gallagher and Medical Research Consultants, which of the following would be the most likely result in the dispute between Ramon and XYZ Co. if Ramon claims he had a three-year contract of employment?

Accepted Answer

A)  XYZ Co. will win because even if a three-year oral agreement for employment was made, it would not have been enforceable because the statute of frauds requires that agreements that cannot be completed within one year be in writing. Further, the draft Ramon returned was not signed by XYZ Co. 
B)  XYZ Co. will win because although the three-year oral agreement for employment was initially enforceable, Ramon reopened negotiations by altering the later contract to provide that he was to receive three weeks of vacation. 
C)  XYZ Co. will win because as a matter of law, no other document can alter the provisions of an employee handbook. 
D)  A jury will decide if Nadia orally agreed to a three-year contract; and, if so, Ramon gets his job back along with the extra weeks of vacation. 
E)  As a matter of law, since the contract was sent to Ramon, he received a guarantee of employment for three years; but he does not get the extra weeks of vacation he inserted. 
A)  XYZ Co. will win because even if a three-year oral agreement for employment was made, it would not have been enforceable because the statute of frauds requires that agreements that cannot be completed within one year be in writing. Further, the draft Ramon returned was not signed by XYZ Co. 
B)  XYZ Co. will win because although the three-year oral agreement for employment was initially enforceable, Ramon reopened negotiations by altering the later contract to provide that he was to receive three weeks of vacation. 
C)  XYZ Co. will win because as a matter of law, no other document can alter the provisions of an employee handbook. 
D)  A jury will decide if Nadia orally agreed to a three-year contract; and, if so, Ramon gets his job back along with the extra weeks of vacation. 
E)  As a matter of law, since the contract was sent to Ramon, he received a guarantee of employment for three years; but he does not get the extra weeks of vacation he inserted.

Question 18

The ________ addresses the admissibility of oral evidence as it relates to written contracts.

Accepted Answer

A)  oral admissibility test 
B)  oral evidence rule 
C)  parol evidence rule 
D)  fraud evidence rule 
E)  deficient evidence test 
A)  oral admissibility test 
B)  oral evidence rule 
C)  parol evidence rule 
D)  fraud evidence rule 
E)  deficient evidence test

Question 19

Describe the three main purposes of the statute of frauds, as discussed in the text.

Accepted Answer

First, the statute attempts to ease cont

Question 20

Which of the following contracts would fall outside the statute of frauds and does not require a writing?

Accepted Answer

A)  Lani offers to paint Ry's house for $1,000. 
B)  Lani offers to buy Ry's horse for $1,000. 
C)  Lani offers to marry Ry in three years. 
D)  Lani offers to pay Ry's student loan if Ry defaults. 
E)  Lani offers to buy the corner of Ry's property where Ry's horse grazes. 
A)  Lani offers to paint Ry's house for $1,000. 
B)  Lani offers to buy Ry's horse for $1,000. 
C)  Lani offers to marry Ry in three years. 
D)  Lani offers to pay Ry's student loan if Ry defaults. 
E)  Lani offers to buy the corner of Ry's property where Ry's horse grazes.

Exam 18: Contracts in Writing

A promise to pay a debt that has already been discharged in bankruptcy must be in writing in order to be enforceable in some states.

William and Katherine are planning to get married. William's attorney indicated the parties should sign an agreement before the two get married that clearly states the ownership rights each party enjoys in the other party's property. This is known as a(n) ________.

Alvin promised Gia that if she quit her job in California and moved to New York, he would have a job for her. Gia sells everything and moves to New York. Alvin however does not hire Gia to work. Under which of the following circumstances would promissory estoppel take effect?

Within the ________, "land" encompasses not only the land and soil itself but anything attached to the land.

In which circumstance may a court find parol evidence admissible to further the court's understanding of an agreement?

Which of the following is a type of contract that does not fall within the scope of the statute of frauds?

Which of the following is true regarding a signature on a document falling within the statute of frauds?

All parties to a contract must sign the writing in order for the statute of frauds to be satisfied.

Which of the following contracts would fall within the statute of frauds and therefore requires a writing?

Which statement is false regarding the statute of frauds?

Which of the following is not an exception to the parol evidence rule?

The ________ addresses the admissibility of oral evidence as it relates to written contracts.

Describe the three main purposes of the statute of frauds, as discussed in the text.

Which of the following contracts would fall outside the statute of frauds and does not require a writing?

An Introduction to Dynamic Business Law

Business Ethics

The Us Legal System

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Constitutional Principles

International and Comparative Law

Crime and the Business Community

Tort Law

Negligence and Strict Liability

Product Liability

Liability of Accountants and Other Professionals

Intellectual Property

Introduction to Contracts

Agreement

Consideration

Capacity and Legality

Legal Assent

Third-Party Rights to Contracts

Discharge and Remedies

Introduction to Sales and Lease Contracts

Title, Risk of Loss, and Insurable Interest

Performance and Obligations Under Sales and Leases

Remedies for Breach of Sales and Lease Contracts

Warranties

Negotiable Instruments: Negotiability and Transferability

Negotiation, Holder in Due Course, and Defenses

Liability, Defenses, and Discharge

Checks and Electronic Fund Transfers

Secured Transactions

Other Creditors Remedies and Suretyship

Bankruptcy and Reorganization

Agency Formation and Duties

Liability to Third Parties and Termination

Forms of Business Organization

Partnerships: Nature, Formation, and Operation

Partnerships: Termination and Limited Partnerships

Corporations: Formation and Financing

Corporations: Directors, Officers, and Shareholders

Corporations: Mergers, Consolidations, Terminations

Corporations: Securities and Investor Protection

Employment and Labor Law

Employment Discrimination

Administrative Law

Consumer Law

Environmental Law

Antitrust Law

The Nature of Property, Personal Property, and Bailments

Real Property

Landlord-Tenant Law

Insurance Law

Wills and Trusts

Filters