Question 1

Danny agrees not to go duck hunting if "Save the Ducks" pays him $100.Danny's forbearance does not constitute legally sufficient consideration.

Accepted Answer

Danny's promise to refrain from an action he is legally entitled to undertake (duck hunting) in exchange for payment is considered a detriment to him and a benefit to "Save the Ducks," thus constituting legally sufficient consideration for a contract.

Question 2

The EU Data Protection Directive created a new crime,called aggravated identity theft.

Accepted Answer

The EU Data Protection Directive does not create new crimes, it rather sets guidelines and regulations for the handling of personal data within the EU. Aggravated identity theft is a criminal offense defined by national laws of some countries, but not by the EU directive itself.

Question 3

Consideration requires that the benefits and sacrifices promised between the parties be legal.

Accepted Answer

Consideration is a necessary component of a legally binding contract, and it requires that the benefits and sacrifices promised between the parties be legal. If the promises involve illegal actions or are against public policy, there is no valid consideration and the contract is not enforceable.

Question 4

Maria's daughter is seriously ill.Desperate,Maria deeds her $250,000 house to a physician for $2,500 of medical treatment.This contract has a valid bargained-for-exchange and is most likely not legally enforceable.

Accepted Answer

This contract has an exchange of value (the house for medical treatment), which satisfies the requirement of a bargained-for-exchange. However, the exchange is highly disproportionate and may be considered unconscionable. Additionally, there may be concerns about undue influence or coercion in the circumstances. Therefore, the contract is not necessarily legally enforceable.

Question 5

The issue in the Classic Case,Hamer v.Sidway,involved the question of legal detriment.

Accepted Answer

The issue in the Classic Case, Hamer v. Sidway, involved the question of legal detriment. The plaintiff claimed that he suffered a legal detriment by refraining from smoking, drinking,and gambling for a period of time in exchange for a promise of money. The court held that the plaintiff did suffer a legal detriment, and thus the promise was enforceable.

Question 6

Contracts created by promissory estoppel are generally considered agreements without consideration.

Accepted Answer

Promissory estoppel is a legal principle that allows a party to enforce a promise even when there is no formal contract or consideration, as long as they have relied on that promise to their detriment.

Question 7

Illusory promises provide mutuality of benefit required in establishing consideration,but only if they involve promissory estoppel.

Accepted Answer

Illusory promises do not provide the mutuality of obligation required for consideration because they do not actually commit the promisor to any course of action. Promissory estoppel is a separate doctrine that can enforce certain promises in the absence of consideration, based on reliance.

Question 8

ABC Co.promises to pay Sarah $1,000 for the "excellent work she has done in the past." When ABC does not pay,Sarah may sue and collect the $1,000.

Accepted Answer

This situation describes a gift rather than a contract because there is no consideration for ABC Co.'s promise; consideration requires a bargained-for exchange, and past actions do not qualify.

Question 9

The legal term used to describe the sacrifice that each party must experience is that party's legal detriment.

Accepted Answer

This is true. Legal detriment refers to the obligation or sacrifice that each party must make to enter into a legally binding contract or agreement.

Question 10

The UCC requires the use of the seal in all sale-of-goods contracts.

Accepted Answer

The UCC does not require the use of a seal in sale-of-goods contracts. It is a common law requirement that has been abolished by many states.

Question 11

Modern courts are willing to enforce charitable pledges as enforceable contractual obligations.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Modern courts are willing to enforce charitable...

Question 12

Alan orally promises to pay a debt that was discharged in bankruptcy.Under federal law Alan's promise is enforceable.

Accepted Answer

If a debt was discharged in bankruptcy, the debtor is no longer legally obligated to pay it. Therefore, any subsequent promises to pay the debt are unenforceable under federal law.

Question 13

The law will enforce an agreement that has not been bargained for.

Accepted Answer

The law generally requires an agreement to be the product of bargaining between the parties involved. If an agreement has not been bargained for, it may be considered invalid or unenforceable.

Question 14

Laura promises to pay Stuart "a reasonable amount" for repairing her car.Stuart sends Laura a $500 invoice and Laura sends Stuart a $350 check marked "payment in full." There is an agreement created by promissory estoppel.

Accepted Answer

While promissory estoppel may create a legal obligation based on a promise, in this case there is no clear promise made by Laura to pay a "reasonable amount" and no reliance by Stuart on such a promise. Furthermore, Laura's check marked "payment in full" creates a legal concept known as accord and satisfaction, which means that Stuart has accepted the $350 payment as full and final settlement of the debt.

Question 15

Assume the CEO of CarolCo Enterprises tenders a $80,000 check to ABC Bank as "Payment in full" of CarolCo's note of $100,000.If ABC cashes the check,this is most likely an accord and satisfaction.

Accepted Answer

If ABC cashes the check, it can be considered as acceptance of the offer to settle the debt for $80,000, and this can be considered as an accord and satisfaction.

Question 16

A bankrupt individual is required by law to repay all of her debts to creditors with an irrevocable offer of reaffirmation.

Accepted Answer

Under bankruptcy law, individuals are not required to repay all of their debts. Additionally, reaffirmation is a voluntary agreement between a debtor and creditor to continue paying a debt that would otherwise be discharged in bankruptcy. It is not an irrevocable offer.

Question 17

Under the general law of contracts,a signed,written offer made by a merchant that allows acceptance at any time within a 90-day time period is not binding unless the offeree signs the offer.

Accepted Answer

Under the general law of contracts, a signed, written offer made by a merchant that allows acceptance at any time within a 90-day time period is binding even if the offeree does not sign the offer. This is known as a firm offer.

Question 18

James,a police officer,solves a crime assigned to him by his police supervisor.The crime victim has offered a $1,000 reward to 'whomever' solves the crime.James may collect the reward even though the reward is an illusory promise.

Accepted Answer

The reward is not an illusory promise because it is a specific offer with a clear condition that has been fulfilled. However, as a police officer performing his duty, James may be prohibited by departmental policies or ethical considerations from accepting rewards for solving crimes.

Question 19

In a release,only one of the parties must make a legally enforceable promise.

Accepted Answer

In a release, both parties must make a legally enforceable promise in order for the release to be valid and binding.

Question 20

Uncle Joe promises Mary a new car on her birthday.Uncle Joe's promise constitutes legally sufficient consideration.

Accepted Answer

Consideration in a legal context refers to something of value exchanged between parties in a contract. A mere promise of a gift, like a new car for a birthday, without something in return from Mary, does not constitute legally sufficient consideration.

Quiz 9: Consideration and Cyber-Payments