FiltersDone

Question type

Essay

Multiple Choice

Short Answer

True False

Matching

Exam 16: Writing, Electronic Forms, and Interpretation of Contracts

Show Answer

Share

---

All types

Filters

Study FlashcardsPractice ExamLearn

Question 31

True/False

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

When persons enter into an agreement, it is presumed that they intent the agreement to have some effect.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 32

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

A contract is created by which the terms are stated to be for consideration in the amount of $3,000.If typewritten in the contract is the term "four thousand dollars," while the amount of $3,000 is printed within the form:

A) ​the contract will be interpreted to be for $3,000.
B) the contract will be interpreted to be for $4,000.
C) ​there is a contract but the courts will not specify the dollar amount, as a conflict exists.
D) ​a compromise settlement amount of $3,500 will be used.

E) C) and D)
F) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 33

Multiple Choice

Review LaterAdd Note

Parol evidence may be admitted to show that a provision was omitted as the result of:

A contract is interpreted to give effect to:

When ________ of the promisor's promise to pay the debt of another is to benefit the promisor, the statute of frauds is not applicable, and the oral promise to pay the debt is binding.

When a contract proves to be a bad bargain:

When an insurance policy is ambiguous, the policy is interpreted:

Jones and Clark entered into a written contract for the purchase of an apartment building by Clark.The contract was carefully drafted to set forth the agreement of the parties.It was signed by both parties.Clark subsequently claimed that the contract did not cover all the terms included in the written and oral agreements that the parties had made during their prior negotiations.?Jones claimed that the parol evidence rule barred proof of all of their prior agreements.Which claim would be upheld in court?

Under the majority view, a contract that does not satisfy the statute of frauds is not enforceable.

A promise to grant a mortgage on real property does not require a writing because it is not a transfer of land.

Bart was a self-made millionaire who had earned his fortune by dedicated hard work.Bart had worked so hard that he never had developed much of a social life.Bart met Linda and fell in love with her.When Bart proposed to Linda, she told him that she needed time before making such an important decision.Pressing her for a favorable response, Bart telephoned Linda and promised her $100,000 if she would marry him.Linda then accepted the proposal.?Bart contracted with Quick Builders for the construction of a home Bart intended to move into with Linda after their marriage.Construction by Quick was not very quick because Quick was not paying subcontractors the sums that they were owed.They, in turn, were not completing their work.To expedite matters, Bart called the subcontractors and assured them that Bart would pay any sums that Quick Builders did not pay if they would complete the construction.?Bart and Linda married and the subcontractors completed the work.Quick Builders did not pay the subcontractors in full.Bart failed to pay Linda the $100,000.Both Linda and the subcontractors sued Bart.Discuss the probable outcome of the lawsuits.

An oral contract to sell a house is binding if:

The Uniform Commercial Code contains a statute of frauds rule relating to sales of personal property, specifically:

A promise to pay a debt must be in writing if:

The one-year performance requirement for an oral contract begins:

A promise to pay an attorney a fee owed by a third person can be enforced without a writing.

To be enforceable under the statute of frauds, the note or memorandum must be signed by the party sought to be bound by the contract.

An oral contract containing a promise by an executor to pay estate debts from estate funds is:

If the main purpose of a promise is to pay the debt of another and benefit the promisor, the statute of frauds is not applicable, and the oral promise to pay the debt is binding.

The parol evidence rule is based on the theory that any oral agreement was abandoned when the contact was written.