Directions: Read each question carefully. Base your answers only on the facts given in the fact pattern. If you believe additional information is necessary to answer the question, please let me know.
MULTIPLE CHOICE: 1 point each
Instructions: Select the best answer and if you wish to defend your answer, give a two-to-three sentence explanation as to why you believe it is the correct choice.
- Sam orally agreed to sell Jamie some land for $500,000. Jamie paid Sam the $500,000; Sam gave Jamie the deed to the land. Jamie took possession of the land and began building a cabin on it. One month later, Sam tried to retake possession of the land by arguing that the contract for the sale was invalid because it was oral, not written. Sam sued Jamie to invalidate the contract and retake the land.
The court will likely conclude that Sam will:
- a) Win; the sale exceeded $500 so the contract must be written to be valid under the Statute of Frauds.
- b) Win; all land sales contracts must be written.
- c) Lose; because the contract was fully executed Sam cannot rescind the contract.
- d) Lose; because Jamie had begun building a cabin on the property, Sam cannot rescind the contract.
- Mac and Rhamad signed a business contract with a clause that provides that if a dispute arises they must submit to binding arbitration to resolve the dispute. After they had been doing business together for a year, a dispute arose under the terms of the contract. Rather than submit to arbitration, Mac filed a lawsuit against Rhamad. Most likely the court will:
- a) Hear the lawsuit because Mac cannot be compelled to submit to arbitration; he is constitutionally entitled to a jury trial if he requests a trial.
- b) Conduct a hearing, then order a remedy without compelling Mac to submit to arbitration or to a jury trial.
- c) Compel Mac to submit to arbitration to resolve the dispute.
- d) Hear the lawsuit in a trial, then compel Mac to submit to arbitration, if Mac is not satisfied with the trial decision.
- Roxy, while driving through Wyoming to her home in Montana, accidentally lost control of her car and drove it through a window into a store owned by Colt. Colt sued Roxy in a Wyoming court for damages to his store.
Will the Wyoming court likely be able to exercise jurisdiction over Roxy?
- a) No, because Wyoming has no in personam (personal) jurisdiction over Roxy, and cannot exercise its long arm statute only in cases involving automobile accidents.
- b) No, because Wyoming has no in personam jurisdiction over Roxy, and cannot justify minimum contacts in this case.
- c) Yes, Wyoming can exercise jurisdiction in this case because there is a federal question involved due to the diversity of citizenship between the parties.
- d) Yes, because Wyoming can assert in personam jurisdiction over Roxy because the accident happened in the state of Wyoming.
- Assume a salesperson intentionally made one of the following statements – knowing that the statement was false – to a customer considering a purchase. Which statement could create liability for fraudulent misrepresentation if the customer made the purchase?
- a) “In my opinion, this car is in flawless mechanical condition.”
- b) “This crane will probably lift about 10,000 pounds.”
- c) “This car is a real gem.”
- d) “This is an original painting by the artist, Pablo Picasso.”
- Ram was walking down the sidewalk by a construction project site in a downtown area. The project was owned and operated by Modern Construction, Inc. and was surrounded by orange plastic fencing typically used for construction projects. Ram stopped to watch a metal beam being lifted by a crane on the construction site. As the beam swung through the air, Ram thought it was going to fall and jumped forward quickly off the sidewalk and into the construction project property, falling into and smashing the orange plastic fencing. As Ram landed inside the construction project, the beam fell near Ram. The beam did not hit Ram but some rocks were thrown onto Ram as the beam fell, cutting his arm so that it required 35 stitches.
If Ram sues Model Construction for negligence, the likely result will be that Ram will:
- a) Lose, because he assumed the risk as a trespasser on the construction site and trespassers can never recover damages.
- b) Lose, because pedestrians are always liable under contributory negligence in such cases involving trespassing.
- c) Win, because it is always foreseeable that a beam could fall on a rescuing pedestrian.
- d) Win, if the beam fell because of Model Construction’s negligence.
- Don promised to buy his girlfriend, Sophie, a new car so relying on Don’s promise, Sophie sold her old car. Don now refuses to buy Sophie the car. Sophie has a job that requires her to have a car to get to work. If Sophie sues Don to enforce the promise, the likely result is that the promise will:
- a) Be enforced under promissory estoppel because Sophie reasonably relied on Don’s promise, to her detriment.
- b) Not be enforced because Sophie received money from the sale of her old car; if she also received the new car from Don, she would be unjustly enriched.
- c) Be enforced because the car is a necessity for Sophie and all contracts for necessities are binding and enforceable for all parties even if contract formation is flawed.
- d) Not be enforced as Don’s promise was a gift to Sophie; Sophie gave consideration, but Don did not.
- Fine Art Corp. sent a written offer to buy 10,000 pencils for a total of $10,000 from Faber Pencil Co. Both parties are merchants. Faber can accept the offer by:
- a) Promising to ship the pencils.
- b) Promptly shipping the pencils.
- c) Accepting the offer on Faber’s own written standard form contract.
- d) All of the above could be valid acceptance.
- Which of the following activities may involve the use of a contract, and/or constitute a sales contract?
- a) Purchasing medications from a pharmacy.
- b) Hiring a contractor to make home repairs.
- c) Purchasing insurance policies from an insurance agent.
- d) Selling books to customers in a bookstore.
- e) All of the above.
- Fay was admitted to Global Associates, an existing general partnership on January 2014. In August 2014, a partnership debt that was incurred in October 2013 came due. Fay is:
- a) Not liable for the debt because the debt was incurred prior to her joining the partnership.
- b) Only liable for the debt up to the amount of her capital contribution to the partnership.
- c) Personally liable only for 50% of the total debt if 50% of the other partners do not pay.
- d) Personally liable for the full extent of the debt if the other partners do not pay.
- Kelly, Lars and Mona agreed to be partners in Neighborhood Deliveries (ND), all splitting the profits equally. Kelly contributed 70% of the capital upon formation of the partnership. Later, the partners agreed to dissolve the partnership, as it was not as profitable as they had expected, and its liabilities were greater than its assets.
The losses are paid by:
- a) All the partners in proportion to their capital contributions.
- b) All the partners in proportion to their share of the profits.
- c) Kelly alone because she contributed the most capital.
- d) Lars and Mona because they contributed the least amount of capital.
- Jim and Kiley are architects and general partners of JK Designs. Jim and Kiley supervise Luc, an employee of JK Designs. As partners, Jim and Kiley
- a) Are personally liable for any/all tort(s) committed by Luc.
- b) May be liable for malpractice, but not torts, committed by Luc while Luc is working within the scope of his job at JK.
- c) May be liable for torts committed by Luc while Luc is working within the scope of his job at JK.
- d) Have no liability for any torts committed by Luc at any time.
- Kisha operates River Valley Soccer, an athletic equipment shop, as a sole proprietorship. Taxes on the business’s income are paid by
- a) No one; since it is a sole proprietorship there are no business taxes.
- b) Kisha as the sole owner.
- c) The state or federal government if Kisha holds a Small Business Administration loan acquired to start her business.
- d) The business entity of River Valley Soccer, not Kisha personally.
- Mediation might be more reasonable and appropriate than a trial in which of the following situations?
- a) A lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a new state statute.
- b) A dispute between neighbors over a property boundary.
- c) An alleged theft of patio furniture from the patio of a house.
- d) None of the above is appropriate for mediation.
Answer questions 14-15 regarding the following scenario:
Scenario: Jones, a resident of Arizona, booked reservations for a vacation at World Hotels, Inc. in Cabo Mar, Mexico. World Hotels is an international hotel chain incorporated in Delaware with hotels in North and South America; World Hotels has no hotels in Arizona but does advertise and book reservations for all its hotels over the internet, in any state. World Hotels has booked reservations in the past with residents of Arizona.
While a guest in the hotel in Cabo Mar, Jones was walking across the hotel lobby, and slipped and fell on the wet marble floor that had been just washed by the maintenance staff. The staff had placed a “wet floor” sign on the lobby floor on the sidewall of the lobby.
Jones was taken to the nearest Mexican hospital where surgery was necessary to place a pin in his broken leg. Anxious to return home and see his regular doctor, Jones flew out of Mexico shortly after the surgery. He required two plane seats and an ambulance to meet him at various airports. His health insurance would not cover his hospital stay in Mexico, as it was located outside the U.S. When back in Arizona, Jones was unable to work for 8 weeks and required another surgery to remove the pin. He also required several weeks of physical therapy.
- Jones wants to sue World Hotels, Inc. for negligence for $450,000 to recover all his medical expenses in Mexico and the US; for $50,000 for the cost of the plane trip from Mexico to Arizona, the 2 plane seats and ambulance costs in various airports; $10,000 for 8 weeks of lost wages; and $50,000 for pain and suffering resulting from the injury. Can he sue in federal court?
- a) Yes, because federal court always has jurisdiction over citizens of different states.
- b) No, because federal court does not have jurisdiction in cases that do not involve federal laws.
- c) Yes, because the federal court may have jurisdiction over citizens of different states and the lawsuit involves damages greater than $75,000.
- d) No, because the federal court has no jurisdiction over an accident that occurred in Mexico.
- It would be easier for Jones to bring the lawsuit in Arizona state court, but he wonders if the court can get World Hotels to come to Arizona. Can the Arizona state court impose jurisdiction over World Hotels to bring the company to court in Arizona?
- a) No, because the subject of the lawsuit took place in a foreign country.
- b) No, because the corporation does not have sufficient minimum contacts with Arizona to allow the Arizona court to use the long arm statute to establish jurisdiction in Arizona.
- c) Yes, because the Jones is a resident of Arizona and he is the plaintiff in the lawsuit.
- d) Yes, because World Hotels has sufficient minimum contact with the state of Arizona to justify the court’s use of the long arm statute.
- Dan went to Doctor to have an x-ray. Dan did not sign a written contract, and Dan and Doctor did not make an oral agreement regarding the x-ray. When Doctor billed Dan $500 for the x-ray, Dan refused to pay. Doctor sued Dan to recover the $500. Which of the following is true about Doctor’s lawsuit?
- a) Doctor can recover under the quasi-contract theory of promissory estoppel.
- b) Doctor can recover under an implied contract theory.
- c) Doctor cannot recover because there was no express contract.
- d) Doctor cannot recover because Dan did not give consideration for the bargain.
- Under the UCC, Section 2-207 (the “battle of the forms” provision), it is provided that, when both parties to a contract are merchants, any additional terms added in the acceptance of a standard form contract can properly, validly become part of the contractual agreement UNLESS:
- The original offer expressly limits any acceptance only to the terms in the original standard form offer.
- The additional terms in the acceptance materially alter the terms of the original standard form offer.
- The offeror notified the offeree, within a reasonable period of time, that the additional terms were not acceptable.
- All of the above could be true.
- Leon, a bank vice president, joined Fitness Center, Inc. (FC). He signed a contract stating, among other things, an exculpatory clause that FC…
“shall not be liable for any claim, demand, cause of action of any kind whatsoever for, or on account of death, personal injury, property damage or loss of any kind resulting from or related to Member’s use of facilities or participation in any sport, exercise or activity within the club premises…”
Leon sustained head injuries when a treadmill on which he was walking collapsed at FC. Leon sued FC for his injuries. The court most likely will rule:
- In favor of Leon because the exculpatory clause is against public policy.
- In favor of Leon because the exculpatory clause is too broad in scope.
- In favor of FC because the exculpatory clause is not unconscionable under the circumstances.
- In favor of FC because it had a valid enforceable contract with Leon as Leon knowingly signed the contract.
ESSAY: 3 points each.
Instructions: Frame a complete definition of the legal question asked and explain how the law applies to the facts. Suggested length is at least one to two paragraphs.
- Refer to the scenario for Multiple Choice questions 14-15 above to answer the following essay question #1 only:
Jones sued World Hotels, Inc. for negligence to recover damages for his injuries resulting from the fall in the Cabo Mar hotel. Will Jones likely be successful in the negligence lawsuit against World Hotels? Please discuss all the elements of negligence in your answer. Are there any defenses that World Hotels can use to relieve it from liability? Explain.
- Dan, Fran and Stan want to establish a bike sales and rental shop. Dan and Fran will be actively involved in managing the business operations, and Stan is investing most of the money. The 3 want to use a form of business organization that will give limited liability to each of them. Using THREE of the seven factors as discussed in class (liability, taxation, financing, management, liquidity, formalities, and life of business) discuss what would be the best type of business organization to limit their liability, and why?
- On May 3, Racer contacted Oscar by writing offer sent registered mail whether he could drive Oscar’s one-of-a-kind, specially designed championship racecar in the Miami 500 Race on July 15 for a fee of $2500. Oscar responds in an acceptance sent registered mail on May 5 and received May 10th. On July 1, the racecar was destroyed in an accidental fire in a storage warehouse where the racecar was being stored prior to the race. Oscar owns no other racecars, so Oscar considered the contract discharged. Racer claimed that he is still entitled to the $2500 fee because he and Oscar had a valid enforceable contract. First, determine whether there is a valid contract with all necessary elements. Second, if a valid contract exists, consider whether there is an issue with a defense.
- Sam wrote a letter to Julia’s Lawn Service stating, “I will pay you $600 if you will remove the 3 elm trees from my front lawn not later than September 1.” On August 29, Julia removed the 3 elm trees from Sam’s front lawn. Sam refused to pay Julia; he claimed that they did not form a valid, enforceable contract because Julia did not respond in writing to his letter. Julia sued Sam for breach of contract. Does a valid contract exist? Explain discussing the necessary elements. If so, does Julia have a viable claim to sue for breach?