afternoon midtermA

doc

School

Baruch College, CUNY *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1101

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

doc

Pages

4

Uploaded by SargentSteel10471

Report
Law 1101 – Prof. Rosenberg Midterm Exam 2:30pm-3:45pm, Fall 2023 1. Your answers should be in paragraph form using full sentences and the appropriate terminology. 2. Answers must show that you found the legal issues presented by the problem; that you know the legal principles to be applied; and that you are familiar with the legal terms. 3. You must explain your answer fully. Correct answers with incomplete explanations will not receive full credit. Wrong answers with persuasive explanations will receive substantial partial credit. 4. Think out your answers carefully before writing. Be brief but thorough. 5. You may write on this question sheet, but only your answers in the Blue Book will be graded. Hand in this question sheet along with your Blue Book. 6. There are 5 questions worth a total of 100 points. Answer all 5 questions. 7. You may not use any outside materials whatsoever. This means no dictionaries of any kind. No notes or books. No calculators or other electronic devices. DO NOT TURN TO THE NEXT PAGE UNTIL THE PROFESSOR INDICATES THAT THE EXAM HAS BEGUN. 1
1. Nancy, a farmer, filled the back of her pick-up truck with melons for sale at the local farmer’s market. Since there was not enough room for all the melons in the back of the truck, Nancy piled several melons on the front passenger seat. Nancy knew that this was a dangerous practice since the road to the market was bumpy and the melons on the passenger seat could easily roll around. While Nancy was driving, one of the melons on the passenger seat rolled onto the floor near her feet and caused Nancy to lose control of the truck. The truck slid off the road hit a telephone pole and came to a violent stop. At that moment, because of the impact of the truck against the telephone pole, several of the melons fell out of the truck and rolled on to the street. Two of the rolling melons hit Boris who was riding a bicycle in the bike lane about ten feet from the telephone poll. As a result, Boris crashed and suffered an injury. Jill, who was driving by, stopped in the street, picked up one of the rolling melons and put it into the trunk of her car. When she got home, she parked the car on her steeply inclined driveway and opened the trunk in order to take the melon inside. The melon rolled out of trunk and into the street and knocked over Imelda, a bicyclist who was riding legally in the bike lane in front of Jill’s house. Imelda suffered injuries as a result. a. Boris sues Nancy claiming negligence. Judgment for whom? Explain. b. Imelda is not sure who to sue. She tells a lawyer, “If Nancy had not been negligent, I would not have been hurt. Let’s sue Nancy!” Imelda therefore sues Nancy claiming negligence. Judgment for whom? Explain. 2. Maria was owner and manager of a garden supply wholesale company. On October 1, 2023, she wrote a note to Percy, owner and manager of a garden supply retail store. The note read: “Hi Percy: I offer to sell to you one Acme brand lawn mower for $399. I promise to keep this offer open until March 1, 2024. (signed) Maria.” On February 15, 2024, Maria spoke to Percy and told him: “I revoke my offer of October 1.” On February 18, 2024, Percy sent a letter to Maria that read: “I accept your offer of October 1.” Maria received the letter on March 3 rd . a. Maria refused to deliver the lawn mower and Percy sued her for breach of contract. Judgment for whom? Explain. b. Would your answer to (a) be different if both Percy and Maria were accountants and not in the garden supply business? Explain. 2
3. Dorothy and William entered into a loan agreement whereby Dorothy loaned William $400 on June 1, 2021 and William agreed to pay her back $500 on May 31, 2023. Unfortunately, on the day that the repayment was due, May 31, 2023, William only had $465 and was unable to pay back the loan fully. a. On May 31, 2023, William met with Dorothy and said, “I am really sorry, but I do not have the full $500. I will be happy to pay you $465 right now, but only if you absolutely promise not to sue me for the rest and put that promise in writing.” Dorothy thought about it for a moment, took out a piece of paper and wrote, “I Dorothy, agree to accept $465 in full discharge of the debt of $500 that William owes me. (signed) Dorothy.” William pays Dorothy and Dorothy sues him for the other $35 she claims he owes her. Judgment for whom? Explain. b. Instead of the facts in (a), assume that William said, “I am really sorry, but I do not have the full $500. I will be happy to pay you $465 right now and arrange a job interview for you at my uncle’s car wash if you absolutely promise not to sue me for the rest.” Dorothy thought about it for a moment and said, “Yes, I agree. Pay me $465 and speak to your uncle on my behalf and I won’t sue you for the rest.” Although William asked Dorothy to put this promise in writing, Dorothy refused. William then paid Dorothy $465 and spoke to his uncle. His uncle called Dorothy in for an interview at his car wash, but did not ultimately offer her a job. Dorothy then sues William for the other $35 she claims he owes her. Judgment for whom? 4. Brooks, a builder, was interviewed by a property owner, Frank, for the contract to build a home on a vacant lot. During the interview, Frank asked Brooks to tell him about himself. Brooks said many things, among them the following: 1. “I have extensive experience building homes in this county”; and 2. “Tess Abernethy, the plumber I will use on the job, is fully licensed by the State of New York and in good standing.” Relying on these statements, Frank hired Brooks to build the home on his property for a total of $100,000. Later Frank learned the following: a. Brooks had built a total of 4 homes in the county over the last five years; and b. Tess Abernethy, the plumber Brooks used for the job, was unlicensed. The publicly available New York State Plumber Licensing website listed Tess as “licensed revoked” as a result of her installation of faulty pipes in a home in 2018. 3
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Frank believes that Brooks committed fraud that he (Frank) relied upon in agreeing to hire him (Brooks) to build a home on his property. Frank immediately rescinds the contract with Brooks. Brooks argues that he did not commit fraud. Did Brooks commit fraud? Please answer, by addressing both statements numbered 1 and 2 above. Explain fully. 5. Ludwig and Ella entered into an agreement whereby Ludwig agreed to clean Ella’s house for a fee of $250. Ludwig cleaned the ground floor and the upstairs floor but did not clean the basement because he did not believe that the contract required him to clean the basement. When Ella inspected Ludwig’s work, she told him that she would not pay the full $250 because Ludwig had failed to clean the basement. Ella asserted that she believed that the language of the contract was clearly intended to include cleaning the basement. After half an hour of negotiation, Ludwig says, “Let’s stop arguing: pay me $200 and I will accept it as full payment of my services.” Ella replies, “OK. I agree.” Ella then sends Ludwig a check for $200 with a note indicating that it is full payment for his recent cleaning services. Ludwig signs the back of the check and deposits it in his bank account. A week later, Ludwig sues Ella for what he claims is the remaining $50 owed to him. (Please read both part (a) and part (b) before answering either question) . a. Judgment for whom? Explain. b. Would your answer to (a) be different if Ludwig had written “Under Protest” on the back of the check before he deposited it? Explain. END OF EXAM 4