Yolanda agrees to bathe and groom Wendy's dog, Fluffy Puff, for $30. Yolanda agreed to the price before seeing Fluffy Puff who is a chubby dog with lots of hair. Yolanda tells Wendy that if she is going to groom Fluffy Puff, the price will be $40. Wendy reluctantly agrees but tells Yolanda that she should not have been surprised that a dog named Fluffy Puff had lots of hair. Yolanda bathes and grooms Fluffy Puff, but Wendy will only pay $20. Which of the following is correct regarding Yolanda's entitlement to the extra $10?
A. Yolanda is entitled to the extra $10 because a valid bilateral contract existed.
B. Yolanda is entitled to the extra $10 because a valid unilateral contract existed.
C. Assuming the unforeseen circumstances rule does not apply, Yolanda is not entitled to the extra $10 because she had a preexisting duty to bathe and groom Fluffy Puff for $30.
D. Assuming the unforeseen circumstances rule does not apply, Yolanda is not entitled to the extra $10 because Wendy's promise to pay $30 was illusory.
E. Assuming the unforeseen circumstances rule does not apply, Yolanda is not entitled to the extra $10 because past consideration was involved.
A. Yolanda is entitled to the extra $10 because a valid bilateral contract existed.
B. Yolanda is entitled to the extra $10 because a valid unilateral contract existed.
C. Assuming the unforeseen circumstances rule does not apply, Yolanda is not entitled to the extra $10 because she had a preexisting duty to bathe and groom Fluffy Puff for $30.
D. Assuming the unforeseen circumstances rule does not apply, Yolanda is not entitled to the extra $10 because Wendy's promise to pay $30 was illusory.
E. Assuming the unforeseen circumstances rule does not apply, Yolanda is not entitled to the extra $10 because past consideration was involved.
Which of the following are exceptions to the preexisting duty rule?
A. Unforeseen circumstances only.
B. Additional work only.
C. Past consideration only.
D. Unforeseen circumstances and additional work, but not past consideration.
E. Unforeseen circumstances, additional work, and past consideration.
A. Unforeseen circumstances only.
B. Additional work only.
C. Past consideration only.
D. Unforeseen circumstances and additional work, but not past consideration.
E. Unforeseen circumstances, additional work, and past consideration.
Sally goes to have her hair trimmed and agrees to pay $40 to the stylist. While there, Sally decides that she would also like highlights. The stylist informs her that highlights will cost an additional $30. Sally agrees to the price, gets the highlights, but refuses to pay the extra amount. What is the likely result in a dispute between Sally and the stylist and why?
A. The stylist will win because she did additional work in exchange for the extra payment; and, therefore, Sally's promise was supported by valid consideration.
B. The stylist will win because she did additional work in exchange for the extra payment; and, therefore, a valid unilateral contract existed.
C. The stylist will win unless Sally can show that she had previously received both a trim and highlights for $40. If she can prove that she previously received both for $40, then the past expectations rule applies.
D. Sally will win because the stylist had a preexisting duty to have Sally's hair look as good as possible.
E. Sally will win because there was no valid consideration in exchange for the highlighting.
A. The stylist will win because she did additional work in exchange for the extra payment; and, therefore, Sally's promise was supported by valid consideration.
B. The stylist will win because she did additional work in exchange for the extra payment; and, therefore, a valid unilateral contract existed.
C. The stylist will win unless Sally can show that she had previously received both a trim and highlights for $40. If she can prove that she previously received both for $40, then the past expectations rule applies.
D. Sally will win because the stylist had a preexisting duty to have Sally's hair look as good as possible.
E. Sally will win because there was no valid consideration in exchange for the highlighting.
Under Article ______ of the UCC, an agreement modifying a contract needs no consideration to be binding.
A. One
B. Two
C. Three
D. Five
E. None of the above. There is no such rule in the UCC.
A. One
B. Two
C. Three
D. Five
E. None of the above. There is no such rule in the UCC.
Sam, who has a retail clothing store, orders 50 white shirts from XYZ manufacturer. He later calls a representative of XYZ and requests that blue shirts be sent instead. The representative agrees and sends a confirmation. Sam gets white shirts and complains. The XYZ representative says there was no consideration for the contract. Which of the following is the correct resolution of the dispute?
A. Sam is correct because under the UCC, no additional consideration was needed.
B. Sam is correct because a valid unilateral contract existed.
C. The XYZ representative is correct because no additional consideration was provided.
D. The XYZ representative is correct because no valid bilateral contract existed.
E. The XYZ representative is correct because no additional consideration was provided, and no valid bilateral contract existed.
A. Sam is correct because under the UCC, no additional consideration was needed.
B. Sam is correct because a valid unilateral contract existed.
C. The XYZ representative is correct because no additional consideration was provided.
D. The XYZ representative is correct because no valid bilateral contract existed.
E. The XYZ representative is correct because no additional consideration was provided, and no valid bilateral contract existed.
No comments:
Post a Comment