Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
20 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
The law of contracts is , generally a creation of federal law. T/F |
f; state law |
|
|
there are 50 separate bodies of contract law one for each state, the ditrict of columbia, us territories and separate body of law concerning federal contracts |
t |
|
|
Parties must first obtain a court's permissionbefore selecting - as a provision in their contract - a particular state's lawto govern their transaction. T/Fm |
f |
|
|
The parties' selection of a particular state's law to govern their contractual rights and duties is always enforceable. T/F " |
f |
|
|
The forum state is the state where the partiesentered into the contract. T/F |
f |
|
|
The forum state is the state where the partiesintend to perform the contract. T/F |
f |
|
|
The forum state is the state where plaintiff filed the the lawsuit. T/F |
t; forum means court |
|
|
The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) deals with the sale of goods. T/F |
true; goods are deffined as all things that are movable. this includes natural resources like lumber to man made items such as computers and clothes |
|
|
For some issues, federal contract law maypreempt state contract law, making state contract law inoperative. T/F |
true |
|
|
The UCCis state law. T/F |
true |
|
|
Zuckermanwas an eyewitness to a car accident caused by a negligent driver. The negligentdriver promised Zuckerman $10,000. if Zuckermanwould promise to commit perjury (lie under oath) at the upcoming trial.Zuckerman accepted the offer. However, even though Zuckerman made good on his promise,the offeror reneged - he flatly refused to pay Zuckerman after the trial. Now,Zuckerman wants to sue the negligent driver for breach of contract. AssumingZuckerman can prove that the driver breached his promise, will Zuckerman win?Y/N |
no; hell no; when a party promises to do what he or she is already legally obligated to do, it is not constitutional. likewise, when a party promises to do something illegal it is not constituition |
|
|
Famous Hollywood starlet Denise Dubois signed a contract withZuckernman Publishers ("Zuckerman")for her menmoirs. Tragically,Dubois died (she was run over by a beer truck ) when she had completed abouthalf of the book. If Zuckerman sued Dubois' estate for breach of contractalleging that Dubois had failed to deliver a completed manuscript, the estatewould respond as follows: No breach - compliance. No breach- excuse. No breach - justification. No breach-terminated duty. Breach. |
no breach excuse here performance would be impossible |
|
|
CSUEB contracted with Educational Innovation, Inc.("EII) for a very detailed , wide ranging study of the university. Underthe contract, CSUEB would pay a consulting fee plus expenses. The contractcalled for CSUEB to pay (a) the consulting fee in four quarterly payments and(b) the expenses monthly. EII worked on this assignment for six months ( theparties expected the project vto last one year). Then, howeverr, EII refused tocontinue as it had not been paid any of its fees or expenses. If CSUEB sues EII for breach of contract ( alleging that EIIhad breached by informing CSUEB that it would not complete the project), EIIwould respond as follows: No breach-compliance. No breach -excuse. No breach-justification. No breach-tewrminated duty.Breach." |
no breach justification;remember not performing or complying with the contract does not always breach the contract. Eli would explain, sore. we are no longer combing with the tersm of the contact, but we are not breaching, instead you the tt, are the breaching party, your breach was significant that, under the law it is demmed a material breach and we legaaly no longer have to perform. that is our non perforamce is justified by your breach |
|
|
Under the "party autonomy" rule, if the contracting parties select a state and incorporate it as their choice of law provision in their contract, then the court in the forum state will enforce this choice of law provision unless: a. The chosen state has no substantial relationship to the parties. b. The chosen state has no substantial relationship to the transaction. c. The result obtained from the application of the law of the chosen state would be contrary to the forum state's public policy. d. The chosen state was not the place of the making of the contract. e. A-c. |
e. a- c |
|
|
In a multi-state transaction, if the parties do not include a choice of law provision in their contract and the forum state decides to apply the choice of law rule that applies the law of the state with the most significant contacts or relationship with the transaction, the court will consider the following contacts: a. The place of contracting. b. The place where the contract was negotiated. c. The place where the contract is to be performed. d. The location of the subject matter of the contract. e. The domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation, and place of business of the parties. c |
all of the above |
|
|
16. Identify those transactions that Article 2 of the UCC controls: a. An employment contract. b. A contract to sell natural gas (after it has been extracted from a well). c. A contract to sell advertising time on the radio. d. A contract to sell a cow with her calf. e. B and d. |
e b and d concers the sale of goods |
|
|
Whether a defendant's breach in a breach of contract lawsuit ("action") is intentional or unintentional is irrelevant. T/F |
t |
|
|
The "reasonable person" views a transaction from a subjective point of view. T/F |
f |
|
|
Whether a person intended to make an offer is determined by that person's subjective intent. T/F |
f; resonab;e person |
|
|
Modern contract law is based on the objective theory of contracts rather than the subjective theory of contracts. T/F |
t; objective test |
