Question 1

Which of the following is needed in order to satisfy the UCC's requirement for a written document?

Accepted Answer

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. 
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.

Question 2

The purpose of the parol evidence rule is to prevent attempts to use only oral evidence to prove agreements.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 3

Under ____, if the buyer in an alleged contract for the sale of land has paid any portion of the sale price, has begun to permanently improve the land, or has taken possession of the land, the courts will consider the contract partially performed, and this partial performance will amount to proof of the contract.

Accepted Answer

A)  Substantial performance 
B)  Partial performance 
C)  Sales substantiation 
D)  The purchase proof rule 
E)  The sales proof rule 
A)  Substantial performance 
B)  Partial performance 
C)  Sales substantiation 
D)  The purchase proof rule 
E)  The sales proof rule

Question 4

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

Accepted Answer

A)  The statute is intended to prevent oral claims to the existence of a contract for the sale of land. 
B)  The statute requires a writing as evidence of a contract to sell land. 
C)  A claim to an oral contract for the sale of land is not enough to prove a contract of sale existed. 
D)  Mortgages on land are within the statute of frauds. 
E)  No leases are within the statute of frauds. 
A)  The statute is intended to prevent oral claims to the existence of a contract for the sale of land. 
B)  The statute requires a writing as evidence of a contract to sell land. 
C)  A claim to an oral contract for the sale of land is not enough to prove a contract of sale existed. 
D)  Mortgages on land are within the statute of frauds. 
E)  No leases are within the statute of frauds.

Question 5

"Courtroom Surprises." Wilma agrees to sell Wally her house for $200,000. Wilma, Wally, and the house are all located in Tennessee. She also orally agrees to sell her used car to Wally for $1,000. Wilma and Wally discuss the fact that the house needs some repairs. Wilma gives Wally a key and tells him to do whatever he wants with the house. In reliance on her promise to sell the house, Wally sells his home, gets a loan, and has a new roof put on Wilma'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, Wilma refuses to sign either. Wally sues, and the case proceeds to trial. Wilma 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.

-Which of the following is true regarding Wilma's statement to the judge under oath that she orally agreed to sell the house?

Accepted Answer

A)  The statement has no effect because of the statute of frauds. 
B)  The statement would be excluded from consideration as parol evidence but only because it involved an amount in excess of $5,000. 
C)  The judge would be estopped from considering the evidence. 
D)  The statement would be classified as an admission and would establish an exception to the statute of frauds involving the agreement on the house. 
E)  The statement would be excluded from consideration because of the collateral interest rule. 
A)  The statement has no effect because of the statute of frauds. 
B)  The statement would be excluded from consideration as parol evidence but only because it involved an amount in excess of $5,000. 
C)  The judge would be estopped from considering the evidence. 
D)  The statement would be classified as an admission and would establish an exception to the statute of frauds involving the agreement on the house. 
E)  The statement would be excluded from consideration because of the collateral interest rule.

Question 6

"Courtroom Surprises." Wilma agrees to sell Wally her house for $200,000. Wilma, Wally, and the house are all located in Tennessee. She also orally agrees to sell her used car to Wally for $1,000. Wilma and Wally discuss the fact that the house needs some repairs. Wilma gives Wally a key and tells him to do whatever he wants with the house. In reliance on her promise to sell the house, Wally sells his home, gets a loan, and has a new roof put on Wilma'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, Wilma refuses to sign either. Wally sues, and the case proceeds to trial. Wilma 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.

-Which of the following is true regarding Wilma's statement to the judge that the agreement to sell the car was covered by the statute of frauds?

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 7

One way parties can indicate their desire to create an integrated contract is through the use of a[n] ______ clause.

Accepted Answer

A)  Complete 
B)  Merger 
C)  Adhesion 
D)  Bilateral 
E)  Acknowledged 
A)  Complete 
B)  Merger 
C)  Adhesion 
D)  Bilateral 
E)  Acknowledged

Question 8

Which of the following is an exception as to when a secondary obligation needs to be in writing?

Accepted Answer

A)  The primary-purpose rule 
B)  The resulting-fact rule 
C)  The main-purpose rule 
D)  The delineated rule 
E)  The personal-obligation standard 
A)  The primary-purpose rule 
B)  The resulting-fact rule 
C)  The main-purpose rule 
D)  The delineated rule 
E)  The personal-obligation standard

Question 9

"Not So Rich Uncle." Bruce is attempting to convince Sally 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. Sally reluctantly agrees, and they sign an agreement by which Bruce agrees to provide the Mercedes and world tour. Bruce and Sally marry on January 1. Unexpectedly, on March 1, Bruce's supposedly rich uncle, Frank, dies. Frank has no living relatives other than Bruce and has a will leaving everything to Bruce who is also appointed executor. In attempting to settle the estate, Bruce agrees orally to pay out of his own pocket debts of Frank totaling $10,000. Sally is concerned about Bruce's doing so. Bruce tells her not to worry because he will get all the money back when the estate settles. Bruce 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 Sally. Surprisingly, it later came to light that prior to his death Frank had signed away all his assets to his girlfriend in Argentina. There was nothing left in the estate for Bruce to inherit. Bruce disavowed his agreement to pay the $10,000 to various creditors of Frank.
-Which of the following is true regarding Bruce's promises to Sally of a Mercedes and a trip?

Accepted Answer

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 Sally can prove that she would not have married Bruce without the assurance of the Mercedes and the trip. 
D)  The promises fall within the statute of frauds unless Bruce can prove that Sally 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. 
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 Sally can prove that she would not have married Bruce without the assurance of the Mercedes and the trip. 
D)  The promises fall within the statute of frauds unless Bruce can prove that Sally 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.

Question 10

What does the term "parol" in the "parol evidence rule" mean?

Accepted Answer

A)  Words establishing penalties 
B)  Speech or words, specifically words outside the original writing 
C)  Oral speech as opposed to written words 
D)  Written words as opposed to oral speech 
E)  Signature required 
A)  Words establishing penalties 
B)  Speech or words, specifically words outside the original writing 
C)  Oral speech as opposed to written words 
D)  Written words as opposed to oral speech 
E)  Signature required

Question 11

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?

Accepted Answer

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. 
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.

Question 12

"Lake House." Harry has two houses, a house on the lake and a house in town. Rebecca wants to buy the house on the lake. Harry and Rebecca orally agree that Rebecca will buy the house on the lake for $300,000. Harry hurriedly writes out a contract providing that he would sell "his house" to Rebecca for $300,000. Harry signs the top of the document. Rebecca does not sign at all. No merger clause is included in the contract. Harry backs out of the contract, and Rebecca 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 Rebecca 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.
-Which of the following is true regarding Harry's assertion that the statute of frauds is left unsatisfied because he did not sign the document at the end?

Accepted Answer

A)  Harry is correct. 
B)  Harry is incorrect because while the statute of frauds would require his signature on the document, there is no requirement that the signature be at the end. 
C)  Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require his signature so long as the selling price was referenced. 
D)  Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require his signature so long as the type of subject matter involved was referenced. 
E)  Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require his signature so long as the parties were clearly identified. 
A)  Harry is correct. 
B)  Harry is incorrect because while the statute of frauds would require his signature on the document, there is no requirement that the signature be at the end. 
C)  Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require his signature so long as the selling price was referenced. 
D)  Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require his signature so long as the type of subject matter involved was referenced. 
E)  Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require his signature so long as the parties were clearly identified.

Question 13

"Lake House." Harry has two houses, a house on the lake and a house in town. Rebecca wants to buy the house on the lake. Harry and Rebecca orally agree that Rebecca will buy the house on the lake for $300,000. Harry hurriedly writes out a contract providing that he would sell "his house" to Rebecca for $300,000. Harry signs the top of the document. Rebecca does not sign at all. No merger clause is included in the contract. Harry backs out of the contract, and Rebecca 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 Rebecca 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.
-Which of the following is true regarding Harry's assertion that the statute of frauds is not satisfied because Rebecca did not sign the document?

Accepted Answer

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

Question 14

The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act reflects the decision that electronic transactions do not constitute a written copy because the electronic transaction is not technically a written document.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 15

What types of contracts does the statute of frauds require to be in writing? Include in your answer contracts, if any, the UCC requires to be in writing.

Accepted Answer

The types of contracts for which the sta

Question 16

A[n] ______ is a statement made in court, under oath, or at some stage during a legal proceeding in which a party against whom charges have been brought admits that an oral contract existed, even though the contract was required to be in writing.

Accepted Answer

A)  Admission 
B)  Submission 
C)  Deposition 
D)  Interrogatory 
E)  Confirmation 
A)  Admission 
B)  Submission 
C)  Deposition 
D)  Interrogatory 
E)  Confirmation

Question 17

In most states, which of the following are exceptions to when the statute of frauds would apply?

Accepted Answer

A)  Admissions, partial performance, and promissory estoppel 
B)  Partial performance and admissions, but not promissory estoppel 
C)  Promissory estoppel but not admissions or partial performance 
D)  Promissory estoppel and partial performance, but not admissions 
E)  Admissions but not partial performance or promissory estoppel 
A)  Admissions, partial performance, and promissory estoppel 
B)  Partial performance and admissions, but not promissory estoppel 
C)  Promissory estoppel but not admissions or partial performance 
D)  Promissory estoppel and partial performance, but not admissions 
E)  Admissions but not partial performance or promissory estoppel

Question 18

"Lake House." Harry has two houses, a house on the lake and a house in town. Rebecca wants to buy the house on the lake. Harry and Rebecca orally agree that Rebecca will buy the house on the lake for $300,000. Harry hurriedly writes out a contract providing that he would sell "his house" to Rebecca for $300,000. Harry signs the top of the document. Rebecca does not sign at all. No merger clause is included in the contract. Harry backs out of the contract, and Rebecca 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 Rebecca 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.
-Which of the following is true regarding Harry's assertion that under the parol evidence rule he had the right to identify the house referenced in the contract?

Accepted Answer

A)  Harry is correct. 
B)  Harry is incorrect because under the parol evidence rule, Rebecca, as the buyer, would be allowed to identify the subject matter in the event of a discrepancy. 
C)  Harry is incorrect because under the parol evidence rule, the judge would likely allow oral evidence regarding the house at issue in order to clarify an ambiguity. 
D)  Harry is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in situations involving an ambiguity. 
E)  Harry is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in the absence of a merger clause. 
A)  Harry is correct. 
B)  Harry is incorrect because under the parol evidence rule, Rebecca, as the buyer, would be allowed to identify the subject matter in the event of a discrepancy. 
C)  Harry is incorrect because under the parol evidence rule, the judge would likely allow oral evidence regarding the house at issue in order to clarify an ambiguity. 
D)  Harry is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in situations involving an ambiguity. 
E)  Harry is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in the absence of a merger clause.

Question 19

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

Accepted Answer

A)  Hawaii and Alaska 
B)  Louisiana and New York 
C)  Louisiana and California 
D)  Kentucky and Florida 
E)  North Carolina and Montana 
A)  Hawaii and Alaska 
B)  Louisiana and New York 
C)  Louisiana and California 
D)  Kentucky and Florida 
E)  North Carolina and Montana

Question 20

Which of the following is false regarding international treatment of evidentiary matters?

Accepted Answer

A)  German law does not have a parol evidence rule. 
B)  France has a limited parol evidence rule. 
C)  The parol evidence rule in France does not apply to commercial contracts. 
D)  England requires that promises to pay for the debt of others be in writing. 
E)  England has significantly increased the number of contracts falling within the statute of frauds since the original act was passed. 
A)  German law does not have a parol evidence rule. 
B)  France has a limited parol evidence rule. 
C)  The parol evidence rule in France does not apply to commercial contracts. 
D)  England requires that promises to pay for the debt of others be in writing. 
E)  England has significantly increased the number of contracts falling within the statute of frauds since the original act was passed.

Exam 18: Contracts in Writing

Which of the following is needed in order to satisfy the UCC's requirement for a written document?

The purpose of the parol evidence rule is to prevent attempts to use only oral evidence to prove agreements.

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

One way parties can indicate their desire to create an integrated contract is through the use of a[n] ______ clause.

Which of the following is an exception as to when a secondary obligation needs to be in writing?

What does the term "parol" in the "parol evidence rule" mean?

The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act reflects the decision that electronic transactions do not constitute a written copy because the electronic transaction is not technically a written document.

What types of contracts does the statute of frauds require to be in writing? Include in your answer contracts, if any, the UCC requires to be in writing.

A[n] ______ is a statement made in court, under oath, or at some stage during a legal proceeding in which a party against whom charges have been brought admits that an oral contract existed, even though the contract was required to be in writing.

In most states, which of the following are exceptions to when the statute of frauds would apply?

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

Which of the following is false regarding international treatment of evidentiary matters?

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