Uslawessentials Contract Quiz 1

1. David writes down in his diary, "I'm going to sell my old TV to the first person who offers me $300." Patty calls just then and offers $300 for David's TV. Does David have to sell the TV?

No, because David didn't speak to Patty or show her his diary.

No, because Patty's communication was oral, and David's was in writing.

Yes, because David's diary entry was in writing.

Yes, because the parties had a meeting of the minds.

2. A University announces that any student who registers for a scholarship program at the Dean's office and performs 100 hours of community service will receive a $1,000 scholarship. Peter performs the community service without registering first. Does the University have to provide the scholarship?

Yes, because in a unilateral contract, a party accepts by performing.

Yes, provided the value of Peter's service was reasonably equivalent to the value of the scholarship.

No, because the University required the students to register first.

No, because there was no return consideration for the University's promise.

3. A company offers $1,000 to anyone who slips while wearing the company's safety shoes. Patty slips. Does the company have to pay her?

Yes, this was a unilateral contract.

No, advertisements are not offers.

Yes, provided $1,000 is commercially reasonable.

No, negligence is a basis for a tort, not for breach of a contract.

4. John is in the business of selling fancy watches. He signs a letter promising Mary that she may take up to 4 months to decide whether to buy a watch or not. Before 4 months pass, Mary tells John that she decided to buy the watch. Do the parties have an agreement?

No, because the offer automatically expired after three months.

No, because there was no consideration for John's promise.

Yes, if the price of the watch was greater than $500.

Yes, unless John revoked the offer.

5. David offers to sell a watch to Peter for $200. Peter says, "I'll pay $180" David turns away. Peter says, "OK, $200." Does David have to sell the watch?

No, the deal was not in writing.

Yes, provided a reasonable period of time did not lapse before Peter accepted.

No, Peter rejected the offer.

Yes, David rejected the counteroffer.

6. Of the following, which is the LEAST accurate definition of a contract in the United States?

A legally recognized obligation a person owes to others to avoid causing harm, either carelessly or intentionally.

A promise that can be enforced in court.

A promise that, if broken, can result in liability.

A legally enforceable agreement.

7. Debby gets a haircut but refuses to pay. If the stylist sues for payment, what is likely to be the stylist's best argument?

The prices on the stylist's wall constitute an express, written contract, executed by Debby.

Debby owes her for the reasonable value of her services pursuant to a theory of quasi contract.

The parties had an implied in fact contract.

A personal services contract can be oral.

8. A car company offers to buy all of the tires it needs from a tire manufacturer. The manufacturer agrees. Can this form the basis of an enforceable agreement?

Yes, because the parties agreed that the car company will buy all the tires it needs from the manufacturer.

No, because the UCC does not have gap filling provisions for quantity.

No, because the contract is vague and ambiguous.

9. If a court decides that the common law applies to a lawsuit complaining that a book printer failed to properly print 1000 fine art books, what would be the LEAST likely reason:

The court applied the predominant purpose test.

The court applied the gravamen of the action test.

Books are goods.

The plaintiff is complaining about a defective service.

10. Peter is going on vacation. He asks Don to secure his car for one week in his garage in exchange for $750. The car is damaged and Peter sues. Does Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code apply to this agreement?

No, because the contract was not in writing.

Yes, because the car's damage while under Don's care satisfies any concern about the existence of a contract.

Yes, because the car could have been moved, even if it was technically not moved for one week.

No, because there was no transfer of title for money.