BLAW 3310: Exam 2 Updated 2024/2025 Actual Questions and answers with complete solutions

A civil wrong other than a breach of contract is - a tort A contract for the purchase and sale of illegal drugs - is void A contract for the sale land - is governed by the common law A contract for the sale of goods - is governed by Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. A promise without consideration - is not a contract A tort - is a civil wrong other than a breach of contract. an award of money damages to plaintiff in a breach of contract case is an example of - a remedy at law An equitable remedy is only available when - the remedy at law is inadequate An example of a duty of absolute performance is: - an obligation to repay a loan of money An example of discharge of contractual obligation by objective impossibility of performance is: - all of the above Article 2 of the uniform commercial code contain significant departures from the common law - true Consideration does not have to involve the payment of money. - trueConsideration must involve the exchange of money. - false For a promise to be contractually binding on the promisor, it must be supported by legally sufficient consideration? - True If a minor enters into a contract the contract is - voidable If a party fails to perform an absolute duty owed by that part under a contract - such party has breached the contract If a plaintiff successfully proves that a defendant breached a contract, money damages - must be separately proved by preponderance of the evidence In a case involving fraud in the inducement - both a and b In order for plaintiff to recover an equitable remedy, the plaintiff must first prove - the inadequacy of the remedy at law In order to form a contract there must be - (a) an offer (b) an acceptance (c) both a and b. (answer) More inability to perform a contract - does not result in discharge Most torts are - fault based parol evidence is admissible to show - nothing, since parol evidence is never admissible. Preston Ponzi says to Pearl Pureheart, "I have the opportunity to purchase four oil and gas leases in Louisiana and I plan to immediately re-sell them for a good profit to a party i already have lined up. Youcan invest in them for $300,000.00 each for a total of $1,200,000.00. I will be putting in an equal amount. When I 'flip' each of them i'll split the net profit with you after you receive back your initial investment." Pearl agreed to the plan and wrote a check to Preston for $1, 200,000.00. Preston cashed the check. But instead of purchasing the leases, he did what he planned all along, using Pearl's money to pay off some court judgments which had been taken against him by parties whom he had previously swindled. - Punitive damages - are damages awarded in intentional tort cases Questions 14 & 15: Phoebe sweet went was interested in buying a used car which Oliver Ozone had for sale. While in the process of test driving the car, Phoebe asked Oliver whether or not the car had ever been in a wreck. Oliver knew nothing of the history of the car before he bought it, but he answered Phoebe's question by stating: "No. This car has never been in a wreck." Although it had been repaired, it was worth much less than the value it would have been if it had not been in the wreck. When Phoebe learned the truth, she filed a lawsuit against Oliver Ozone seeking damages for fraud. - The applicability of the Parol Evidence Rule presupposes? - an integrated contract The parol evidence tule applies - only to integrated contracts The tort theory of strict liability has been applied - in cases involving extra-hazardous activities the tort theory of strict liability has been applied - in detective product cases Under the above facts - Preston is guilty of both breach of contract and of fraud. Under the above facts, pearl - may sue and recover both actual and punitive damages from PrestonUnder the above facts, the contract between Preston and Pearl is - voidable Under these fact - Phoebe can make a case for constructive fraud. Under these facts - (a) Oliver could be liable for compensatory damages. (b) Oliver could be liable for punitive damages. (c) both a and b. (answer) (d) Oliver can successfully defend against any claim of fraud in view of the fact that he did not know that the statement was false and he had no intent to deceive Phoebe