NYLE: ContractsPractice Exam 2025
UPDATE/PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND CORRECT
VERIFIED ANSWERS(complete
solutions)ASSURED SUCCESS/GRADED A+!!!
Save
Terms in this set (25)
Generally, a contract entered into under a mutual
mistake of fact by the parties is voidable and subject
to rescission or reformation (Matter of Gould v
Board of Educ. of Sewanhaka Cent. High School
Dist., 81 NY2d 446 [1993]). The mistake must be so
I. Mutual Mistake material that it goes to the foundation of the
agreement. The mutual mistake must exist at the time
the contract is entered into and must be substantial,
and any court-ordered relief is reserved only for
"exceptional situations" (Simkin v Blank, 19 NY3d 46,
52 [2012]).
, A unilateral mistake alone is an insufficient basis for
reformation or rescission, in the absence of a
showing of fraud, duress or similar inequitable
conduct (Barclay Arms v Barclay Arms Assoc., 74
NY2d 644 [1978]). The party alleging the mistake
must also show:
Unilateral Mistake · that the mistake was material;
· that it was made unknowingly despite the exercise
of ordinary care in entering the contract;
· that enforcement of the contract would be
unconscionable and would result in unjust
enrichment of one party at the expense of the other;
· that the parties can be returned to the status quo
without prejudice
, In New York, a person who is under the age of 18 is
an infant (GOL 1-202; 3-101). A contract entered into
by an infant is not void, but voidable at the infant's
election and until an infant disaffirms his or her
contract, it is binding on the infant and the other
contracting party. An infant may disaffirm his
contract during infancy or within reasonable time
after coming of age (Horowitz v Manufacturers' Trust
Co., 239 AD 693 [1st Dept 1934]).
II. Inability to Consent, The common-law right of infants to disaffirm has also
including Infancy: GOL § been modified by various statutes (Shields v Gross,
1-202, 3-101 58 NY2d 338 [1983]); Civil Rights Law § 51 (infant's
contract consenting to the use of their name or
image for advertising purposes); General Obligations
Law § 3-101 [3]) (infant's contract to borrow money to
purchase a home); General Obligations Law § 3-102
(married infant's obligation for hospital, medical and
surgical treatment and care for infant or infant's
children); Education Law § 281 (infant's contract for
college loan); and Arts and Culture Law § 35.03
(infants' contracts for actors, dancers and
professional athletes).
UPDATE/PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND CORRECT
VERIFIED ANSWERS(complete
solutions)ASSURED SUCCESS/GRADED A+!!!
Save
Terms in this set (25)
Generally, a contract entered into under a mutual
mistake of fact by the parties is voidable and subject
to rescission or reformation (Matter of Gould v
Board of Educ. of Sewanhaka Cent. High School
Dist., 81 NY2d 446 [1993]). The mistake must be so
I. Mutual Mistake material that it goes to the foundation of the
agreement. The mutual mistake must exist at the time
the contract is entered into and must be substantial,
and any court-ordered relief is reserved only for
"exceptional situations" (Simkin v Blank, 19 NY3d 46,
52 [2012]).
, A unilateral mistake alone is an insufficient basis for
reformation or rescission, in the absence of a
showing of fraud, duress or similar inequitable
conduct (Barclay Arms v Barclay Arms Assoc., 74
NY2d 644 [1978]). The party alleging the mistake
must also show:
Unilateral Mistake · that the mistake was material;
· that it was made unknowingly despite the exercise
of ordinary care in entering the contract;
· that enforcement of the contract would be
unconscionable and would result in unjust
enrichment of one party at the expense of the other;
· that the parties can be returned to the status quo
without prejudice
, In New York, a person who is under the age of 18 is
an infant (GOL 1-202; 3-101). A contract entered into
by an infant is not void, but voidable at the infant's
election and until an infant disaffirms his or her
contract, it is binding on the infant and the other
contracting party. An infant may disaffirm his
contract during infancy or within reasonable time
after coming of age (Horowitz v Manufacturers' Trust
Co., 239 AD 693 [1st Dept 1934]).
II. Inability to Consent, The common-law right of infants to disaffirm has also
including Infancy: GOL § been modified by various statutes (Shields v Gross,
1-202, 3-101 58 NY2d 338 [1983]); Civil Rights Law § 51 (infant's
contract consenting to the use of their name or
image for advertising purposes); General Obligations
Law § 3-101 [3]) (infant's contract to borrow money to
purchase a home); General Obligations Law § 3-102
(married infant's obligation for hospital, medical and
surgical treatment and care for infant or infant's
children); Education Law § 281 (infant's contract for
college loan); and Arts and Culture Law § 35.03
(infants' contracts for actors, dancers and
professional athletes).
