Exam 18: Contracts in Writing

[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 under oath that she orally agreed to sell the house,which of the following is true?

What is a purpose of the parol evidence rule?

[RV and bike deal] For his retirement,Milton wants to rent an RV and spend the summer travelling out West.Milton stops by Rudi's RV Heaven and Rudi tells him that he could rent an RV for the summer for $6,000.Milton,who had already researched rental costs,told Rudi he would agree to the price and also wanted to buy two of the bicycles Rudi showed him that were $100 each.Milton and Rudi shook hands and Milton said he would return the next day.When Milton returned,Rudi had the bicycles ready to go,but told Milton that the price for the RV was $8,000,not $6,000.Milton tells him that he cannot change the price because they had an enforceable agreement.Milton also tells him that he will not buy the bicycles,but Rudi tells him the agreement about the bicycles is enforceable and he wants Milton to pay him. -Does the agreement to rent the RV for $6,000 fall outside the statute of frauds and,thus,would likely be enforceable against Rudi?

When a contract is incomplete,a court will not look at industry standards to complete the contract unless the parties had agreed to follow standard industry practice.

Regarding Rishi getting a loan and putting a new roof on the house,which of the following is true?

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?

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?

All courts consider merger clauses to be conclusive proof of a contract.

What are the eight exceptions to the parol evidence rule?

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.

Under which of the following circumstances would promissory estoppel take effect?

Regarding Damian's assertion that under the parol evidence rule he had the right to identify the house referenced in the contract,which of the following is true?

Which of the following is false regarding the statute of frauds and promises made in consideration of marriage?

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?

Which of the following is false regarding written contracts?

Which of the following is false regarding the statute of frauds provision relating to an interest in land?

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?

Which of the following is a clause parties include in a written agreement that states that the written agreement accurately reflects the final,complete version of the agreement.

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?

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