A) No leases are within the statute of frauds.
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) The statute is intended to prevent oral claims to the existence of a contract for the sale of land.
E) Mortgages on land are within the statute of frauds.
G) All of the above
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) In general,written contracts aid in the conduct of smooth business contracts.
B) The moment of writing allows both parties to reconsider terms and ensure what they desire.
C) The idea of requiring a writing comes from an English law.
D) Disputes are easier to settle when contractual terms are solidified in writing.
E) All contracts must be in writing in order to be enforced.
G) A) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) To restrict oral and written evidence from being admitted that supports an agreement in its written form.
B) To restrict evidence from being admitted that substantially contradicts an agreement in its written form.
C) To restrict oral evidence from being admitted that supports an agreement in its written form.
D) To restrict hearsay from being admitted that supports or contradicts an agreement in its written form.
E) To restrict written evidence from being admitted that supports an agreement in its written form.
G) A) and C)
Correct Answer
verified
B
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
The adjuster is not correct.The insurer ...View Answer
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
A) That the contract was not in writing and,therefore,could not be enforced.
B) That the contract could be enforced because of the parol evidence rule.
C) That the contract was enforceable because of the partial-performance exception to the statute of frauds.
D) That the contract could not be enforced because of the parol evidence rule.
E) That the contract was enforceable because agreements for professional services do not come within the protection of the statute of frauds.
G) A) and C)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) The statement would be classified as an admission and would establish an exception to the statute of frauds involving the agreement on the house.
B) The judge would be estopped from considering the evidence.
C) The statement would be excluded from consideration because of the collateral interest rule.
D) The statement has no effect because of the statute of frauds.
E) The statement would be excluded from consideration as parol evidence but only because it involved an amount in excess of $5,000.
G) A) and C)
Correct Answer
verified
A
Correct Answer
verified
A) Merger
B) Consolidation
C) Complete
D) Adhesion
E) Parol
G) B) and C)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
The exceptions are 1)contracts that have...View Answer
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
A) Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the type of subject matter involved was referenced.
B) Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the parties were clearly identified.
C) Damian is correct.
D) Damian is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the selling price was referenced.
E) Damian is incorrect because he is the one being sued,and he signed the document.
G) B) and C)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
B) False
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) No,because the agreement involved the lease of goods and must be in writing.
B) No,because the agreement is for the sale of goods over $500,which is within the statute of frauds and must be in writing.
C) Yes,because the agreement involved the lease of goods,which need not be in writing
D) Yes,because the contract can be performed within one year.
E) No,because the contract may not be performed within one year.
G) B) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
A
Correct Answer
verified
A) Gianni,because the contract cannot be completed in one year.
B) Dolton,because the contract can be completed in one year because Dolton could die within a year of the contract's creation.
C) Gianni,because Gianni did not sign any agreement and he is the party being charged.
D) Dolton because,even though the contract was not completed within one year,public policy does not support lifetime employment contracts that are not in writing.
E) Gianni,because Dolton did not die during the year after the contract's creation.
G) C) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Any party required to sign must sign at the beginning of the document.
B) There is no requirement of any signature of either party to satisfy the statute of frauds.
C) Any party required to sign must sign both at the end and at the beginning of the document.
D) So long as it is meant as a signature,a party required to sign may sign at any place on the document.
E) Any party required to sign must sign at the end of the document.
G) D) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
An admission is a statement made in cour...View Answer
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
B) False
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) His actions would likely amount to promissory estoppel,which establishes an exception to the statute of frauds.
B) The judge would consider his actions under the UCC as exceptions to the parol evidence rule.
C) His actions would be considered only because Alexandra told the judge that she had orally agreed to the contract.
D) Rishi should have known better,and his actions would be of no use to him in attempting to enforce the contract.
E) His actions would be considered as admissions.
G) All of the above
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) XYZ Co.will win because as a matter of law,no other document can alter the provisions of an employee handbook.
B) XYZ Co.will win because even if a three-year oral agreement for employment was made,it would not have been enforceable because the statute of frauds requires that agreements that cannot be completed within one year be in writing.Further,the draft Ramon returned was not signed by XYZ Co.
C) A jury will decide if Nadia orally agreed to a three-year contract;and,if so,Ramon gets his job back along with the extra weeks of vacation.
D) As a matter of law,since the contract was sent to Ramon,he received a guarantee of employment for three years;but he does not get the extra weeks of vacation he inserted.
E) XYZ Co.will win because although the three-year oral agreement for employment was initially enforceable,Ramon reopened negotiations by altering the later contract to provide that he was to receive three weeks of vacation.
G) All of the above
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Gia's reliance on Alvin's promise was foreseeable.
B) Gia relied on Alvin's promise which Alvin knew she would do.
C) Gia relied on Alvin's promise to her detriment and Alvin should have known Gia would rely on it.
D) Gia relied on Alvin's promise to her detriment.
E) Alvin knew Gia would rely on his promise.
G) C) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) A prenuptial agreement is not automatically enforceable just because it is in writing.
B) Agreements regarding marriage in which one party is gaining something other than a return on his or her promise to marry are within the statute of frauds and must be in writing.
C) Mutual promises to marry fall within the statute of frauds.
D) When one party promises something to the other as part of an offer of marriage,the contract must be in writing to be enforceable.
E) Prenuptial agreements fall within the statute of frauds.
G) B) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Damian is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in situations involving an ambiguity.
B) Damian is incorrect because under the parol evidence rule,Frida,as the buyer,would be allowed to identify the subject matter in the event of a discrepancy.
C) Damian 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) Damian is correct.
E) Damian is incorrect because the parol evidence rule would not apply in the absence of a merger clause.
G) B) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 1 - 20 of 90
Related Exams