To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library






1. D Farrell’s offer was for a unilateral contract — his promise to pay in return for Stuart’s postponing the wedding. When Stuart postponed the wedding, he accepted Farrell’s offer, and a contract was formed.

Some cases have held that an agreement never to marry violates public policy, but there is no reason why an agreement to postpone a marriage would do so. A is, therefore, incorrect. B is incorrect because Farrell’s promise was to pay if Stuart postponed the wedding. His language did not make payment conditional upon Stuart’s registration for a second year. Although an offer terminates upon the death of the offeror, C is incorrect because Stuart accepted the offer by postponing the wedding, and once accepted, an offer is no longer revocable.

2. B Damages are available as a remedy for the breach of a promise not to assign a contract. Assignments made in violation of such a promise are usually regarded as valid, however.

A is incorrect because a contract which prohibits assignment without the consent of one of the parties does not require that party to act reasonably in deciding whether or not to consent. C is incorrect because although Corman might be liable for damages, the assignment will probably be regarded as valid. The only thing that the contract required Corman or his assignee to do was make payment. D is incorrect because that is hardly a personal service.

3. C Consideration is a benefit to the promisor or a detriment to the promisee which was bargained for and given in return for the promisor’s promise. For this reason, if Curran did something which he was already obligated to do, his act could not be consideration for the City’s promise to pay since no new benefit was given to the City and no detriment was sustained by Curran in return for that promise. A police officer’s obligation to his employer includes the duty to attempt to apprehend criminals; so Curran’s performance was of a pre-existing duty.

A is incorrect because establishing that Pidgeon is entitled to the reward does not necessarily establish that Curran (or anybody else) is not entitled to it also. B is incorrect because a guilty plea is regarded as a conviction. Since the City’s promise was to pay in return for information leading to a conviction, it was an offer to pay for something of value, not an offer for a gratuitous cash award. D is, therefore, incorrect.

4. D The Statute of Frauds requires a contract for the sale of goods with a price of $500 or more to be in writing, but does not apply to a contract for services, even if goods are to be provided by the person performing the services. I and II are, therefore, incorrect.

5. B The UCC treats a modification of a contract as a new contract. For this reason, if the contract as modified falls within the provisions of the Statute of Frauds, the modification must be in writing. Since the modification resulted in an agreement to sell goods with a price of $500 or more, the Statute of Frauds requires a written memorandum. The absence of a writing makes the contract unenforceable over the objection of Ronson.

A is incorrect because the fact that the typewriter ribbons were available at a lower price is not enough to make Wells’s demand unconscionable. C is incorrect because under the UCC an agreement to modify a contract may be enforceable even though unsupported by consideration. D would be relevant if Wells attempted to excuse his own non-performance by asserting impossibility or frustration of purpose. Since Ronson agreed to the modification, however, Wells’s reason for requesting it is irrelevant to its enforceability.

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following