LSU BLAW 3201 FRY Final Version C Newest 2025
Complete 100 Questions And Correct Answers
(Verified Answers) |Already Graded A+||Brand New!!
/. The obligation to perform to a party. - Answer-delegation transfers
/.Voluntary transfer to a third party of the rights arising from a contract so that the
assignor's rights to performance are extinguished. - Answer-assignment of rights
/.Party making an assignment; handing off the contractual rights. - Answer-assignor
/.Party to whom contract rights are assigned. - Answer-assignee
/.The party owing a duty to the assignor under the original contract, the person who
must perform. - Answer-obligor
/.The party to whom a duty of performance is owed under a contract. - Answer-obligee
/.Law governing assignments is primarily under ___________. - Answer-Article 2 of the
UCC
/.Requirements of an assignment include _______ but not _______. - Answer-intent;
consideration
/.When the assignee gives consideration, the assignor may not revoke the assignment
without the assignee's consent. - Answer-revocability of assignment
/.Transfer of a portion of contractual rights to one or more assignees. - Answer-partial
assignment
/.Most contract rights are assignable, except? - Answer-1. Assignments that materially
increase the duty, risk, or burden upon the obligor.
2. Assignments of personal rights.
3. Assignments expressly forbidden by the contract.
4. Assignments prohibited by law.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: In Re Magness: Why did the trustee
in bankruptcy want to assign the golf memeberships? - Answer-The trustee sought to
assign the golf memberships to recover value for the bankruptcy estate by selling them
to members on the waiting list, other members, or the general public.
,/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: What did the bankruptcy court
decide regarding the assignment of the golf memberships? - Answer-The bankruptcy
court found that the club's rules functioned as anti-assignment provisions and ruled that
the trustee could not assign the memberships.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: How did the district court view the
nature of the contract between the club and its golfing members? - Answer-The district
court saw the contract as a personal, non-commercial agreement, not a lease, involving
social and recreational relationships.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: What is the significance of the
waiting list in the court's decision? - Answer-The waiting list represented individuals with
contractual expectations and financial investments based on a defined selection
process, which would be undermined by allowing the trustee to assign memberships.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: Why did the court refer to the
contract as a "personal contract"? - Answer-Because the membership involved personal
relationships and activities (like golfing and socializing), under Ohio law, such contracts
are not assignable without consent due to the importance of the individuals involved.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: Could the trustee assign the golf
memberships if the club had consented? - Answer-Potentially yes, because personal
contracts can sometimes be assigned with the consent of all involved parties. In this
case, the club did not consent.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: What legal principle did the court
apply in denying the trustee's motion to assign the golf memberships? - Answer-The
principle that personal contracts, where the identity or personality of the parties is
essential, are not assignable unless consent is given.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What was
the main issue on appeal in this case? - Answer-Whether the trial court erred in granting
summary judgment to the landlord and awarding attorney's fees, based on the
enforceability of a partial assignment of lease benefits.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What specific
right did the tenant assign to Robert Aldana? - Answer-The tenant assigned its rights to
receive the first $8000 of a construction allowance from the landlord.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: How did
Robert Aldana secure his interest in the assigned right? - Answer-Aldana recorded the
assignment and sent notice to the landlord by certified mail.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: Why did
Aldana sue the landlord? - Answer-Because the landlord paid the construction
, allowance to the tenant instead of Aldana, despite having received notice of the
assignment.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What was
the landlord's main argument in defense? - Answer-The landlord argued that the lease
contained an anti-assignment clause that voided the tenant's assignment ot Aldana.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: How did the
appellate court interpret the anti-assignment clause in the lease? - Answer-The court
held that the clause only prohibited the assignment of duties under the lease, not the
assignment of the right to receive payment.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What effect
did notice of the assignment have on the landlord's obligations? - Answer-Once the
landlord received notice of the assignment, he became obligated to pay the construction
allowance to Aldana instead of the tenant.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What did the
appellate court decide regarding the trial court's summary judgment and attorney's
fees? - Answer-The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and the award of
attorney's fees and remanded the case for further proceedings.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What was
the final outcome of the appellate court's decision? - Answer-The case was reversed
and remanded in favor of Aldana for further proceedings consistent with the appellate
court's interpretation.
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: Who
originally loaned Catherine Roth-Steffen the $20,350 for law school, and through what
program? - Answer-The Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority (MOHELA) through
its CASH loan program.
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: How
much interest had accrued on Roth-Steffen's MOHELA loans as of November 5, 1998?
- Answer-$3,044
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: Did
Roth-Steffen consolidate the MOHELA loan with her other student loans? - Answer-No,
she specifically requested that the MOHELA loan not be consolidated.
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: Who
was ultimately assigned ownership and collection rights of the MOHELA loan? -
Answer-Ownership was assigned to Guarantee National Insurance Company (GNIC),
which then assigned the loan to Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc.
Complete 100 Questions And Correct Answers
(Verified Answers) |Already Graded A+||Brand New!!
/. The obligation to perform to a party. - Answer-delegation transfers
/.Voluntary transfer to a third party of the rights arising from a contract so that the
assignor's rights to performance are extinguished. - Answer-assignment of rights
/.Party making an assignment; handing off the contractual rights. - Answer-assignor
/.Party to whom contract rights are assigned. - Answer-assignee
/.The party owing a duty to the assignor under the original contract, the person who
must perform. - Answer-obligor
/.The party to whom a duty of performance is owed under a contract. - Answer-obligee
/.Law governing assignments is primarily under ___________. - Answer-Article 2 of the
UCC
/.Requirements of an assignment include _______ but not _______. - Answer-intent;
consideration
/.When the assignee gives consideration, the assignor may not revoke the assignment
without the assignee's consent. - Answer-revocability of assignment
/.Transfer of a portion of contractual rights to one or more assignees. - Answer-partial
assignment
/.Most contract rights are assignable, except? - Answer-1. Assignments that materially
increase the duty, risk, or burden upon the obligor.
2. Assignments of personal rights.
3. Assignments expressly forbidden by the contract.
4. Assignments prohibited by law.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: In Re Magness: Why did the trustee
in bankruptcy want to assign the golf memeberships? - Answer-The trustee sought to
assign the golf memberships to recover value for the bankruptcy estate by selling them
to members on the waiting list, other members, or the general public.
,/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: What did the bankruptcy court
decide regarding the assignment of the golf memberships? - Answer-The bankruptcy
court found that the club's rules functioned as anti-assignment provisions and ruled that
the trustee could not assign the memberships.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: How did the district court view the
nature of the contract between the club and its golfing members? - Answer-The district
court saw the contract as a personal, non-commercial agreement, not a lease, involving
social and recreational relationships.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: What is the significance of the
waiting list in the court's decision? - Answer-The waiting list represented individuals with
contractual expectations and financial investments based on a defined selection
process, which would be undermined by allowing the trustee to assign memberships.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: Why did the court refer to the
contract as a "personal contract"? - Answer-Because the membership involved personal
relationships and activities (like golfing and socializing), under Ohio law, such contracts
are not assignable without consent due to the importance of the individuals involved.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: Could the trustee assign the golf
memberships if the club had consented? - Answer-Potentially yes, because personal
contracts can sometimes be assigned with the consent of all involved parties. In this
case, the club did not consent.
/.Rights That Are Not Assignable: Personal Rights: What legal principle did the court
apply in denying the trustee's motion to assign the golf memberships? - Answer-The
principle that personal contracts, where the identity or personality of the parties is
essential, are not assignable unless consent is given.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What was
the main issue on appeal in this case? - Answer-Whether the trial court erred in granting
summary judgment to the landlord and awarding attorney's fees, based on the
enforceability of a partial assignment of lease benefits.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What specific
right did the tenant assign to Robert Aldana? - Answer-The tenant assigned its rights to
receive the first $8000 of a construction allowance from the landlord.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: How did
Robert Aldana secure his interest in the assigned right? - Answer-Aldana recorded the
assignment and sent notice to the landlord by certified mail.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: Why did
Aldana sue the landlord? - Answer-Because the landlord paid the construction
, allowance to the tenant instead of Aldana, despite having received notice of the
assignment.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What was
the landlord's main argument in defense? - Answer-The landlord argued that the lease
contained an anti-assignment clause that voided the tenant's assignment ot Aldana.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: How did the
appellate court interpret the anti-assignment clause in the lease? - Answer-The court
held that the clause only prohibited the assignment of duties under the lease, not the
assignment of the right to receive payment.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What effect
did notice of the assignment have on the landlord's obligations? - Answer-Once the
landlord received notice of the assignment, he became obligated to pay the construction
allowance to Aldana instead of the tenant.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What did the
appellate court decide regarding the trial court's summary judgment and attorney's
fees? - Answer-The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and the award of
attorney's fees and remanded the case for further proceedings.
/.Express Prohibition of Assignment: Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Inc.: What was
the final outcome of the appellate court's decision? - Answer-The case was reversed
and remanded in favor of Aldana for further proceedings consistent with the appellate
court's interpretation.
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: Who
originally loaned Catherine Roth-Steffen the $20,350 for law school, and through what
program? - Answer-The Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority (MOHELA) through
its CASH loan program.
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: How
much interest had accrued on Roth-Steffen's MOHELA loans as of November 5, 1998?
- Answer-$3,044
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: Did
Roth-Steffen consolidate the MOHELA loan with her other student loans? - Answer-No,
she specifically requested that the MOHELA loan not be consolidated.
/.Rights of the Assignee: Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen: Who
was ultimately assigned ownership and collection rights of the MOHELA loan? -
Answer-Ownership was assigned to Guarantee National Insurance Company (GNIC),
which then assigned the loan to Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc.
