BLAW Final Exam Review Ch. 10-18 Pleasant TTU Questions With 100% Correct Answers.

Jackie agrees to pay Ben $1,000 if Ben agrees to not go skydiving for six months. After Ben avoids skydiving for six months, he asks Jackie for payment. Jackie declines to pay Ben the $1,000. The contract between Jackie and Ben: - Answer-will be enforced because Ben exercised forbearance which is legally sufficient consideration. Michael agrees to buy Randy's wheelbarrow for $100. After the agreement is reached but before performance begins, both Michael and Randy agree to terminate the contract. The effect of agreement to terminate is that: - Answer-their contract is cancelled due to rescission. Kenneth's parents own a cattle ranch. When they become too elderly to run the ranch by themselves, Kenneth moves back to the ranch to help them. With his parents' help and permission Kenneth builds a house on the ranch. After he builds it, his parents refuse to deed him the land. Kenneth can sue his parents under the doctrine of: - Answer-promissory estoppel Carol Rogers, a local millionaire, promises to donate $500,000 to the Springfield Humane Society, which the society plans to use to build a new animal hospital. Based on Carol's promise, the society begins work on the hospital. Carol then backs out of her offer. - Answer-Carol can be sued for the money under a theory of promissory estoppel. Liz agrees to cook twenty dinners for Brian, in exchange for which Brian will repair all of the plumbing in Liz's house. Liz has offered legally: - Answer-sufficient consideration, because Liz has promised something of value. Lila tells her friend, Joanne, that she will give her $10,000 toward the purchase of a new car. Lila later changes her mind, and Joanne tells her that she will sue to enforce the contract. A court would likely find that this agreement is: - Answer-unenforceable because there is no bargained-for exchange. Shane is the manager of Twinkle Toy Store. Kate is his best employee. Shane tells Kate, "You've been doing a great job lately. If I like what you do over the next two months, I'll give you a $1,000 bonus." This is: - Answer-an illusory promiseLes agrees to install a new hard drive and modem in Marilee's computer in exchange for four of her used textbooks. After he installs the hard drive, Les says he won't install the modem unless Marilee gives him two more books. What legal position are the parties in now? - Answer-Marilee can sue for breach of contract, because Les had a preexisting duty to do all of the work. Tom agrees to hire Dave for a salary $3,000 a month as a consultant. Tom reserves the right to cancel the contract at any time. Before Dave begins his consultant job, Tom cancels the contract with Dave and hires Stanley. Tom can: - Answer-cancel the contract because the contract is illusory. An inmate escapes from the county prison. There is a $500 reward offered for any information leading to the capture of the inmate. The county sheriff sees the inmate at a local restaurant and calls the department headquarters before arresting the inmate. The sheriff: - Answer-cannot expect to collect the $500 because he had a preexisting duty to arrest the inmate. Madeline signs a contract agreeing to sell Norman her brand-new Porsche 911 automobile for $50. It is possible that a court will: - Answer-look more closely at the bargain to determine whether fraud, duress, or undue influence was involved. Morgan signs an installment loan contract with her banker. The contract specifies that Morgan will pay 3.00% interest every month on the borrowed amount of $50,000 for two years. Both Morgan and the banker know the precise amount of the total obligation. This is an example of: - Answer-liquidated debt. Julia promises to give Mary a piece of original artwork worth $5,000 in return for Mary's stamp collection, which is worth $500. After the exchange, Julia decides that she does not think the bargain was fair and demands that Mary give her back the painting. A court will most likely: - Answer-not interfere with the contract, because the consideration is legally sufficient. Francisco is driving his car when he collides with Wyatt's car. Francisco writes Wyatt a letter in which he offers to pay Wyatt $5,000 if Wyatt will agree to forfeit all of his rights to pursue a lawsuit against Francisco for this accident. If Wyatt agrees and signs the letter, they will have a: - Answer-release Jane agrees to cook twenty dinners for Ryan, and in exchange, Ryan will repair all the plumbing in Jane's house. Jane has offered legally: - Answer-sufficient consideration, because Jane has promised something of value.T or F: Courts generally presume the existence of contractual capacity. - Answer-True Disaffirmance - Answer-The legal avoidance, or setting aside of contractual obligations. Age of Majority - Answer-The age at which an individual is considered legally capable of conducting himself or herself responsibly. Emancipation - Answer-In regard to minors, the act of being freed from parental control; occurs when a child's parent or legal guardian relinquishes the legal right to exercise control over the child. T or F: When a minor who has entered into a contract opts to avoid that contract, she or he can choose the particular portions of the contract to disaffirm. - Answer-False Espinoza is sixteen, but looks much older. She purchases a diamond bracelet, but decides nine months later that it was unwise to spend the money, so she: - Answer-can return the bracelet and get all of her money back T or F: Adults who enter into contracts with minors can avoid their contractual duties just as the minor can. - Answer-False Courts in a growing number of states place additional duties on the minor when the minor disaffirms. These duties include: - Answer-1. The minor is responsible for ordinary wear and tear for the returned property. 2. The minor is responsible for damages to the property returned. 3. The minor is responsible for the depreciation of that returned property. Hineki buys an expensive tablet device to celebrate his seventeenth birthday. Two weeks later, his father insists that he return it. Hineki's attempt to return the tablet will: - Answer-be successful, because he acted within a reasonable timeExceptions to Basic Rules of Disaffirmance: - Answer-1. Misrepresentation of age (or fraud). 2. Necessaries. 3. Ratification Misrepresentation of age, or fraud. (Exception to Basic Rules of Disaffirmance) - Answer-In many jurisdictions, misrepresentation of age prohibits the right of dissafirmance. Necessaries (Exception to Basic Rules of Disaffirmance) - Answer-Minors remain liable for the reasonable value of necessaries. (goods and services.) Ratification (Exception to Basic Rules of Disaffirmance) - Answer-After reaching the *age of majority*, a person can ratify a contract that he or she formed as a minor, thereby becoming fully liable for it. Generally, when minors act on their own, their parents are....... - Answer-.....not liable for contracts made by their minor children. Contracts by Intoxicated Persons: - Answer-- General Rules. - Disaffirmance. - Ratification General Rules (Contracts by Intoxicated Persons) - Answer-If a person was sufficiently intoxicated to lack the *mental* capacity to comprehend the legal consequences of entering into the contract, the contract may be *voidable* at the option of the intoxicated person. Disaffirmance (Contracts by Intoxicated Persons) - Answer-An intoxicated person may disaffirm the contract *at any time* while intoxicated and for a reasonable time after becoming sober but must make full restitution. Contracts for necessaries are voidable, but the intoxicated person is liable for the *reasonable* value of the goods or services.Ratification (Contracts by Intoxicated Persons) - Answer-After becoming *sober*, a person can *ratify* a contract that she or he formed while intoxicated, thereby becoming fully liable for it. Sven goes to a bar, drinks eight shots of bourbon, and then goes to an electronics store, where he buys a large flat-screen TV for $2,500. If he later wants to void the contract based on his intoxication when he bought it, he will need to prove that..... - Answer-...he lacked the mental capacity to enter into the contract. Contracts by mentally ill people: - Answer-- Void. -Voidable. - Valid Void (Contracts by mentally ill people) - Answer-If a court has declared a person to be mentally incompetent and has appointed a legal guardian, any contract made by that person is void from the outset. Voidable (Contracts by mentally ill people) - Answer-If a court has not declared a person mentally incompetent, but that person lacked the capacity to comprehend the subject matter, nature, and consequences of the agreement, then the contract is voidable at the person's option. Valid (Contracts by mentally ill people) - Answer-If a court has not declared a person mentally incompetent and that person was able to understand the nature and effect of the contract at the time it was formed, then the contract is valid and enforceable. Maya sincerely believes that she was born on another planet. She goes to a car dealership and buys a KIA Sorrento, telling the salesperson that she is going to beam the car back to her home planet. Later, if she wants to avoid her contract she must: - Answer-prove that she lacked adequate mental capacity when she bought the car T or F: Ronald suffers from dementia, which impacts his brain function, but he also has healthy periods of time when his mind is fully functioning. During one of these healthy periods, Ronald enters into acontract, which he later seeks to avoid. In a majority of states, the contract will not be enforced because of Ronald's dementia. - Answer-False