A) It was effective because Hester had left the offer open the amount of time required by law regardless of whether she revoked before Frank could accept.
B) It was effective because Hester issued the revocation before Frank could accept.
C) It was ineffective because the amount paid by Martha was less than the offer to Frank.
D) It was ineffective because Hester attempted the revocation at too early a point in time.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) None
B) Reliance damages consisting of $500
C) Incidental damages consisting of $50
D) Compensatory damages consisting of $500
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) punish the breaching party.
B) fluctuate with the market conditions.
C) are agreed upon.
D) none of these choices.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) acceptance
B) obligation
C) factum
D) inducement
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Death or incapacitation of either party terminates an offer.
B) Death of either party terminates an offer, and incapacity on the part of the offeror terminates an offer, but incapacity on the part of an offeree does not terminate an offer.
C) Death of either party terminates an offer, and incapacity on the part of an offeree terminates an offer, but incapacity on the part of the offeror does not terminate an offer.
D) Neither death nor incapacity on either the part of the offeror or offeree terminates an offer.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) illusory promise.
B) requirements contract.
C) output contract.
D) fulfillment contract.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) the pre-contractual letter of intent was enforceable.
B) Pharmathene had breached its obligation to negotiate the licensing agreement in good faith.
C) SIGA had breached its obligation to negotiate the licensing agreement in good faith.
D) the Delaware court had properly applied New York law in the case.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) No, because under the law his stopping smoking was not adequate consideration.
B) No, because it was implied that he would stop smoking for good, and he only quit for six months.
C) Yes, because his stopping smoking for six months, as agreed, was adequate consideration for the contract.
D) Yes, because stopping smoking was good for his health even if he only did it for six months.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Novation
B) Substitution
C) Formal change
D) Verified change
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 1 - 20 of 66
Related Exams