1) Open terms - Under the common law the terms of an offer must be definite. Under the UCC the terms of the contract may be left open and the contract will not fail for "Indefiniteness." Which five terms listed in your textbook, may be left open according to the UCC and what is the term that will be used to "fill in the gap?"

a. (Term 1)

b. (Term 2)

c. (Term 3)

d. (Term 4)

e. (Term 5)

2) Consideration - Under the common law both parties must give consideration for the contract to be binding. It also requires that both parties give new consideration if the contract is going to be modified. Is this the UCC rule as well? Explain.

3) Under the common law, if the offeree does not accept the term of the offer exactly as they are stated by the offeror, the offeree is said to have rejected the offer. and made a counteroffer. This is known as the mirror image rule - the acceptance must be the mirror image of the offer. On the other hand, the UCC permits additional terms to become part of a contract if two conditions are met. What are those two conditions?

4) Under the common law of contracts, if a contract is required to be in writing according to the statute of frauds, it must be signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought. This means if you are suing someone for breach of a contract that had to be in writing because of the statute of frauds, that person has to have signed the contract for you to successfully sue him/her. How does the UCC change this rule? What requirements must be met according for the UCC to enforce a contract against a party who has not signed it?

5)

Read the case Brandt v. Boston ScientificCorporation and Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center. Analyze the case using the IRAC method (described on page 16 of the textbook.) I have given you the rule of law as there is usually some confusion regarding that part of the analysis.

a. Issue

b. Rule of Law - The UCC Warranties apply only when there is a sale of goods. Where there is a mixed contract for good and services, there is a transaction for goods only if the contract is predominately for goods and incidentally for services.

c. Analysis (How did the court apply the rule to the case?)

d. Conclusion What was the result of the case?)

6)

Give two examples of the following terms as they are defined by your textbook: (Do not define the terms but give an example of them. The examples used in the textbook may not be repeated for credit)

a. goods

b. services

c. mixed sale

Please answer all questions