Multiply Choice 1. In the Quake case, the appellate court ruled (a) The letter of intent was

Question:

Multiply Choice
1. In the Quake case, the appellate court ruled
(a) The letter of intent was a valid contract.
(b) Letters of intent are never a valid contract.
(c) A letter of intent can be a valid contract, but this one was not.
(d) The trial court had to determine if the letter of intent was a valid contract.

2. In the Cipriano case, what happened?
(a) The jury decided in favor of Cipriano because arson is vandalism.
(b) The jury decided against Cipriano because arson is not vandalism.
(c) The judge dismissed the motion for summary judgment because the contract was ambiguous.
(d) The judge granted the motion for summary judgment because the contract was not ambiguous.

3. In the case of a scrivener’s error, what happens?
(a) A court will not reform the contract. The parties must live with the document they signed.
(b) A court will reform the contract if there is clear and convincing evidence that the clause in question does not reflect the true intent of the parties.
(c) A court will reform the contract if a preponderance of the evidence indicates that that the clause in question does not reflect the true intent of the parties.
(d) A court will invalidate the contract in its entirety.

4. In the LeMond case, the court ruled:
(a) PTI’s failure to supply marketing and media plans was a material breach of the contract because without those plans, LCI could not monitor sales.
(b) PTI’s failure to supply marketing and media plans was a material breach of the contract because PTI had agreed to supply the plans.
(c) the requirement that PTI use commercially reasonable means to promote the product line was not enforceable because the term was ambiguous.
(d) PTI’s failure to supply marketing and media plans was not a material breach of the contract.

5. A contract states (1) that Buzz Co. legally exists and (2) will provide 2,000 pounds of wild salmon each week. Which of the following statements is true?
(a) Clause 1 is a covenant and Clause 2 is a representation.
(b) Clause 1 is a representation and Clause 2 is a covenant.
(c) Both clauses are representations.
(d) Both clauses are covenants.


Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Step by Step Answer:

Related Book For  book-img-for-question

Business Law and the Legal Environment

ISBN: 978-1111530600

6th Edition

Authors: Jeffrey F. Beatty, Susan S. Samuelson, Dean A. Bredeson

Question Posted: