If an adult enters into a contract with a minor, either party can disaffirm.

True

False

Marty, a 16 year old, contracts with Cream-of-the-Crop Cycles to buy an $8,000 motorcycle. Marty agrees to make monthly payments until the purchase price plus interest are paid in full. Which of the following is correct?

The contract is voidable by Cream-of-the-Crop Cycles

The contract is void as soon as it is made.

The contract is voidable by Marty

all of the above

None of the above

Elements of a contract are:

Agreement (Offer and Acceptance)

Consideration

Legal Purpose

Legal Capacity

All of the above

Claude agrees to lease his house to Irvin for nine months. The lease is to begin six months from the signing of the contract. Under Statute of Frauds:

The lease is not required to be in writing

The lease is required to be in writing because of the one-year rule

the parole evidence rule renders the lease voidable.

The lease is a collateral promise which must be in writing.

The lease is between private citizens and does not have to be in writing.

Hannah orally agrees to sell her house to Brett for $175,000. If she delivers the deed to Brett with the expectation of payment in two weeks and he fails to pay, most courts will not enforce the contract since it was not in writing.

True

False

All contracts must be in writing.

True

False

Vicki entered into a written contract to buy a car from Valley Motors. During the negotiations, the sales representative said that the car had a two-year full warranty. The written contract included a provision that stated, “This writing is the full and final expression of the parties’ agreement; anything said before signing or while signing is irrelevant.” The written contract did not include a warranty. Two months after Vicki took delivery of the car, she discovered that the transmission needed to be replaced. Vicki claimed that it was covered by the full warranty. Will Vicki be able to present evidence as to the sales representative’s statements concerning the warranty?

No. The parol evidence rule will most likely exclude any evidence of the discussion of the warranty.

Yes. The leading object rule will allow evidence as to the discussion of the warranty.

Yes. The evidence is needed because the contract is ambiguous.

No, because the contract was fully executed.

Roger parked his car at a garage that has a large sign at the entrance saying, “This garage is not liable for items stolen from a car.” This type of notice is referred to as an exculpatory clause.

True

False

Travis had too many beers at the baseball game. Ed realized Travis was so intoxicated he wouldn’t know what he was doing, so he got Travis to sign a promise to sell his motorcycle to Ed for $50. When Travis gets sober, he can attempt to void the contract.

True

False

Courts will not allow the rescission of a contract due to a unilateral mistake.

True

False

If Jane persuades Linda to buy her horse by telling Linda that the horse runs “like the wind,” then Jane’s statement is

fraud.

reckless misinterpretation.

a unilateral mistake

puffery

Brahma entered into an oral agreement to sell 50 jet skis to Summer Sports. Brahma delivered 20 of the skis on May 1. On June 1, Summer Sports notified Brahma that it would not honor the agreement. Which statement is correct?

The contract is void since it was oral.

The contract is enforceable for 20 jet skis.

The contract is enforceable for the 50 jet skis.

The contract is obsolete.

When Randy, an electrician, accepted a job with Buren Construction, Randy signed the following agreement: “Upon termination of my employment with Buren Construction, I agree never to work for another employer as an electrician.” If Randy resigns from Buren Construction, this agreement would be upheld under the theory of freedom of contract.

True

False

Under the Statute of Frauds, the writing must: be signed by the defendant; and must state with reasonable certainty the name of each party, the subject matter of the agreement, and all of the essential terms and promises.

True

False

If an adult enters into a contract with a minor, either party can disaffirm.

True

False

Marty, a 16 year old, contracts with Cream-of-the-Crop Cycles to buy an $8,000 motorcycle. Marty agrees to make monthly payments until the purchase price plus interest are paid in full. Which of the following is correct?

The contract is voidable by Cream-of-the-Crop Cycles

The contract is void as soon as it is made.

The contract is voidable by Marty

all of the above

None of the above

Elements of a contract are:

Agreement (Offer and Acceptance)

Consideration

Legal Purpose

Legal Capacity

All of the above

Claude agrees to lease his house to Irvin for nine months. The lease is to begin six months from the signing of the contract. Under Statute of Frauds:

The lease is not required to be in writing

The lease is required to be in writing because of the one-year rule

the parole evidence rule renders the lease voidable.

The lease is a collateral promise which must be in writing.

The lease is between private citizens and does not have to be in writing.

Hannah orally agrees to sell her house to Brett for $175,000. If she delivers the deed to Brett with the expectation of payment in two weeks and he fails to pay, most courts will not enforce the contract since it was not in writing.

True

False

All contracts must be in writing.

True

False

7. Vicki entered into a written contract to buy a car from Valley Motors. During the negotiations, the sales representative said that the car had a two-year full warranty. The written contract included a provision that stated, “This writing is the full and final expression of the parties’ agreement; anything said before signing or while signing is irrelevant.” The written contract did not include a warranty. Two months after Vicki took delivery of the car, she discovered that the transmission needed to be replaced. Vicki claimed that it was covered by the full warranty. Will Vicki be able to present evidence as to the sales representative’s statements concerning the warranty?

No. The parol evidence rule will most likely exclude any evidence of the discussion of the warranty.

Yes. The leading object rule will allow evidence as to the discussion of the warranty.

Yes. The evidence is needed because the contract is ambiguous.

No, because the contract was fully executed.

Roger parked his car at a garage that has a large sign at the entrance saying, “This garage is not liable for items stolen from a car.” This type of notice is referred to as an exculpatory clause.

True

False

Travis had too many beers at the baseball game. Ed realized Travis was so intoxicated he wouldn’t know what he was doing, so he got Travis to sign a promise to sell his motorcycle to Ed for $50. When Travis gets sober, he can attempt to void the contract.

True

False

Courts will not allow the rescission of a contract due to a unilateral mistake.

True

False

If Jane persuades Linda to buy her horse by telling Linda that the horse runs “like the wind,” then Jane’s statement is

fraud.

reckless misinterpretation.

a unilateral mistake

puffery

Brahma entered into an oral agreement to sell 50 jet skis to Summer Sports. Brahma delivered 20 of the skis on May 1. On June 1, Summer Sports notified Brahma that it would not honor the agreement. Which statement is correct?

The contract is void since it was oral.

The contract is enforceable for 20 jet skis.

The contract is enforceable for the 50 jet skis.

The contract is obsolete.

When Randy, an electrician, accepted a job with Buren Construction, Randy signed the following agreement: “Upon termination of my employment with Buren Construction, I agree never to work for another employer as an electrician.” If Randy resigns from Buren Construction, this agreement would be upheld under the theory of freedom of contract.

True

False

Under the Statute of Frauds, the writing must: be signed by the defendant; and must state with reasonable certainty the name of each party, the subject matter of the agreement, and all of the essential terms and promises.

True

False

Case Study: Snack Food Snafu

In 2019, Company X, manufactured a highly desired snack food in their factory. The production of this item occurred, five days a week, 24 hours a day. Production needs quickly escalated. Company X officials soon realized that in order to meet consumer demand, additional work shifts must be implemented. The decision was made to create two new shifts that would take place over the course of every weekend, until further notice. Now that the company added weekend hours, they needed people to work them.

Each additional shift required the combined work effort of six employees, four operators and two servicers. The operators were in charge of running the manufacturing equipment. They were paid ~$25/hr to keep the machines running. The servicers were responsible for stocking consumable materials in the equipment, in order to continue production. Servicers were paid ~$15/hr. ?

Instead of equally distributing additional shifts to both positions, Company X decided to ask for volunteers. They proposed the opportunity to work additional operator shifts to some of the top servicers. The servicers were quick to accept this offer not only because it meant extra money in their pockets, but because there was an opportunity for them to display their higher skill set in hopes of a future promotion. The operators considered this new offer unfair. They came to the conclusion that Company X was not presenting operators with the equal opportunity for over-time because of the pay difference in positions. More than likely, the operators perceived officials formed this decision because it was much cheaper for the company to pay the servicers.

The Operators had a sudden shift in behavior. The operators perceived that the servicers were getting rewards that they were not entitled to. After all, they had not gone to operator school or worked on the production line as long. In addition, they also felt cheated for not being granted the same volunteer opportunities for extra shifts, especially since they were operators and the servicers were clearly not. Those once dedicated to Company X began calling in sick during their regular shifts. At times they even reduced their own level of effort in order to increase the amount of time needed to reach company goals. Raising the level of required time resulted in an inflated number of positions that needed to be filled.

For six long months, the servicers continued to sacrifice their weekends in hope of getting a raise to operator level pay. They believed they were deserving of this raise because of their steady contributions to the company. When servicers asked for a raise, they were told that Company X was unable to afford this type of promotion at the moment. Officials explained to the servicers that funds were insufficient due to the excessive amount of overtime they were paying to cover the production requirements.

Because the company was unable to provide proper rewards to these people, the servicers stopped volunteering for additional shifts. For months they have put countless hours into this company, hoping for recognition of their efforts. They perceived that Company X strung them along, offering them overtime in the position of an operator, to make them believe that if they helped the company out, they would receive something beneficial in return. Servicers came to the conclusion that working at an operator position for no raise in pay was certainly an example of Company X taking advantage of their situation.?

1. What is the behavioral choice for each of the following employees based on their ration comparison? Give examples from the case study of each of these behavior.

Operators Servicers

Identify three (3) Identify three (3)

Change in inputs Change in inputs

Change in outcomes Change in outcomes

Distort perceptions of self Distort perceptions of self

Distort perceptions of others Distort perceptions of others

Choose a different referent other Choose a different referent other

Leave field Leave field