Question 1 Wk06.Contract.The Jersey #1. Dowodu was a football player with a national football team named the “Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team, the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro signed a document as follows: “This document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of 20xx.” mc012-1.jpg Both signed and the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid immediately to Sitro. In August 20xx, before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers. Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment. Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the money. What is the value issue being presented in the scenario? a. Did Dowodu and Sitro have the conversation about the possibility of Sitro being cut? b. What is the legal effect of a conversation modifying the terms of a written contract? c. Both “a” and “b” are correct. d. Is Sitro entitled to any money from Dowodu? e. Does misspelling a name in a contract void the contract? 1 points Question 2 The Jersey. Dowodu was a football player with a national football team named the “Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team, the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro signed a document as follows: “This document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of 20xx.” Both signed and the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid immediately to Sitro. In August 20xx,

Question 1

Wk06.Contract.The
Jersey #1. Dowodu was a football player with a national football team named the
“Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years
and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team,
the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used
on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro
signed a document as follows:

“This
document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu
and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary
compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to
be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of
20xx.”

mc012-1.jpg

Both signed and
the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given
jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid
immediately to Sitro.

In August 20xx,
before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers.

Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the
possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened
Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment.
Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the
money.

What is the value
issue being presented in the scenario?
a.
Did Dowodu and
Sitro have the conversation about the possibility of Sitro being cut?
b.
What is the legal
effect of a conversation modifying the terms of a written contract?
c.
Both “a” and “b”
are correct.
d.
Is Sitro entitled
to any money from Dowodu?
e.
Does misspelling a
name in a contract void the contract?

1 points
Question 2

The Jersey. Dowodu
was a football player with a national football team named the
“Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years
and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team,
the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used
on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro
signed a document as follows:

“This
document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu
and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary
compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to
be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of
20xx.”

Both signed and
the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given
jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid
immediately to Sitro.

In August 20xx,
before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers.

Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the
possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened
Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment.
Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the
money.

Wk06.Contract.The
Jersey. Same as above. What is the factual issue being presented in the
scenario?
a.

Has there been a
mistake?
b.

What is the legal effect of the
conversation?
c.

Is Sitro entitled
to any money from Dowodu?
d.

Did Dowodu and
Sitro have the conversation about the possibility of Sitro being cut?
e.

Both “a” and “b”
are correct.

1 points (Extra Credit)

Question 3

The Jersey. Dowodu
was a football player with a national football team named the
“Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years
and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team,
the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used
on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro
signed a document as follows:

“This
document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu
and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary
compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to
be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of
20xx.”

Both signed and
the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given
jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid
immediately to Sitro.

In August 20xx,
before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers.

Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the
possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened
Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment.
Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the
money.

Wk06.Contract.The
Jersey. Same as above. What evidence does Dowodu have to support his version of
the facts?
a.

A valid, written,
contract was formed between the parties.
b.

The written
contract was modified by the conversation.
c.

His testimony.
d.

The written
contract was not modified by the conversation.
e.

None.

1 points
Question 4

The Jersey. Dowodu
was a football player with a national football team named the
“Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years
and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team,
the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used
on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro
signed a document as follows:

“This
document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu
and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary
compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to
be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of
20xx.”

Both signed and
the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given
jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid
immediately to Sitro.

In August 20xx,
before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers.

Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the
possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened
Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment.
Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the
money.

Wk06.Contract.The
Jersey. Same as above. What evidence does Sitro have to support his version of
the facts?
a.

A valid, written,
contract was formed between the parties.
b.

The written
contract was modified by the conversation.
c.

His testimony.
d.

The written
contract was not modified by the conversation.
e.

None.

1 points
Question 5

The Jersey. Dowodu
was a football player with a national football team named the
“Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years
and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team,
the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used
on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro
signed a document as follows:

“This
document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu
and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary
compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to
be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of
20xx.”

Both signed and
the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given
jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid
immediately to Sitro.

In August 20xx,
before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers.

Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the
possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened
Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment.
Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the
money.

Wk06.Contract.The
Jersey. Same as above. Several legal issues are raised in the scenario. Which
of the following is one of the legal issues being presented in the scenario?
a.

Has there been a
mistake?
b.

What is the legal
effect of the conversation?
c.

Is Sitro entitled
to any money from Dowodu?
d.

Did Dowodu and
Sitro have the conversation about the possibility of Sitro being cut?
e.

Both “a” and “b”
are correct.

1 points
Question 6

The Jersey. Dowodu
was a football player with a national football team named the
“Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years
and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team,
the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used
on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro
signed a document as follows:

“This
document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu
and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary
compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to
be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of
20xx.”

Both signed and
the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given
jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid
immediately to Sitro.

In August 20xx,
before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers.

Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the
possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened
Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment.
Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the
money.

Wk06.Contract.The
Jersey. Same as above. Question: What is the conclusion supported by analysis
to the value issue given the law above? Even if you are not sure of the
conclusion you should be able to pick it out of the choices because only one
choice is a conclusion supported by analysis.
a.

Dowodu has breached the contract.
b.

Sitro wins because a mistake in the spelling of the name
does not void the contract.
c.

Parol or outside evidence, such as testimony, cannot be used
to modify the terms of a complete written contract.
d.

Sitro wins.
e.

Dowodu must pay the money because even if the oral
conversation occurred, it cannot modify the written contract.

1 points
Question 7

The Jersey. Dowodu
was a football player with a national football team named the
“Tornadoes”. He had a successful career with that team for 3 years
and had been assigned the jersey number 32. He was then hired by another team,
the Panthers. Dowodu wanted to keep his jersey number 32 but it was being used
on the Panther’s line up by player Sitro. On May 15, 20xx Dowodu and Sitro
signed a document as follows:

“This
document is being drawn on May 15, 20xx to verify the agreement between Dowodu
and Sitro for the sale of Sitro’s jersey number in exchange for monetary
compensation of $40,000 to be paid as follows: $20,000 immediately, $10,000 to
be paid by Week 8 of the NFL season, and $10,000 by Christmas Day of
20xx.”

Both signed and
the Panther’s manager had no objection to the arrangement and Dowodu was given
jersey #32, Sitro was assigned jersey #38. The first installment was paid
immediately to Sitro.

In August 20xx,
before the season, Sitro was cut by the Panthers.

Dowodu is claiming that he and Sitro discussed the
possibility that Sitro might be cut from the team and that if that happened
Dowodu would not have to pay Sitro anything more than the first installment.
Sitro says there was never any such conversation, Dowodu still owes him the
money.

Wk06.Contract.The
Jersey. Same as above. What is the law applicable to the scenario. Even you do
not know the applicable law you should be able to pick it out of the choices
below because only one of the choices is a law.
a.

Dowodu has breached the contract.
b.

Sitro wins because a mistake in the spelling of the name
does not void the contract.
c.

Parol or outside evidence, such as testimony, cannot be used
to modify the terms of a complete written contract.
d.

Sitro wins.
e.

Dowodu must pay the money because even if the oral
conversation occurred, it cannot modify the written contract.

1 points (Extra Credit)

Question 8

Wk06.UCC.. Rock On
#1. Rock On, LLC enters into a contract with Audio Master, LLC to lease certain
audio equipment for a rock concert. Everything was done by email and no one
mentioned anything about pick up or delivery of the equipment. On the day of
the concert Rock On’s manager calls Audio Master and asks when the equipment
will be delivered. Audio’s manager says, “Whenever you come by to get it, it is
ready”. Rock On sends one of the staff to pick up the equipment. Both parties
agree they have a contract and that the above is exactly what happened.

mc019-1.jpg

Rock On wants to
sue Audio Master for breach of the contract because Rock On thinks Audio Master
was legally required to deliver the equipment.

What is the value
issue raised?
a.
What does the law
say about delivery if the contract is silent about it?
b.
Did Rock On’s
staff member pick up the equipment?
c.
Did Audio Master
breach the contract?
d.
If the contract is
silent about delivery of the goods, then the goods are to be picked up by the
buyer or renter.
e.
None

1 points
Question 9

Rock On, LLC
enters into a contract with Audio Master, LLC to lease certain audio equipment
for a rock concert. Everything was done by email and no one mentioned anything
about pick up or delivery of the equipment. On the day of the concert Rock On’s
manager calls Audio Master and asks when the equipment will be delivered.
Audio’s manager says, “Whenever you come by to get it, it is ready”. Rock On
sends one of the staff to pick up the equipment. Both parties agree they have a
contract and that the above is exactly what happened.

Rock On wants to
sue Audio Master for breach of the contract because Rock On thinks Audio Master
was legally required to deliver the equipment.

Wk06.UCC.. Rock
On. Same as above. What is the factual issue raised?
a.

If the contract is
silent about delivery of the goods, then the goods are to be picked up by the
buyer or renter.
b.

Did Rock On’s
staff member pick up the equipment?
c.

Did Audio Master
breach the contract?
d.

None
e.

What does the law say about delivery if the
contract is silent about it?

1 points
Question 10

Rock On, LLC
enters into a contract with Audio Master, LLC to lease certain audio equipment
for a rock concert. Everything was done by email and no one mentioned anything
about pick up or delivery of the equipment. On the day of the concert Rock On’s
manager calls Audio Master and asks when the equipment will be delivered.
Audio’s manager says, “Whenever you come by to get it, it is ready”. Rock On
sends one of the staff to pick up the equipment. Both parties agree they have a
contract and that the above is exactly what happened.

Rock On wants to
sue Audio Master for breach of the contract because Rock On thinks Audio Master
was legally required to deliver the equipment.

Wk06.UCC.. Rock
On. Same as above. What is the legal issue raised?
a.

If the contract is
silent about delivery of the goods, then the goods are to be picked up by the
buyer or renter.
b.

Did Rock On’s
staff member pick up the equipment?
c.

Did Audio Master
breach the contract?
d.

None
e.

What does the law
say about delivery if the contract is silent about it?

1 points
Question 11

Rock On, LLC
enters into a contract with Audio Master, LLC to lease certain audio equipment
for a rock concert. Everything was done by email and no one mentioned anything
about pick up or delivery of the equipment. On the day of the concert Rock On’s
manager calls Audio Master and asks when the equipment will be delivered.
Audio’s manager says, “Whenever you come by to get it, it is ready”. Rock On
sends one of the staff to pick up the equipment. Both parties agree they have a
contract and that the above is exactly what happened.

Rock On wants to
sue Audio Master for breach of the contract because Rock On thinks Audio Master
was legally required to deliver the equipment.

Wk06.UCC.. Rock
On. Same as above. What law applies to this situation? Even if you do not know
what law applies you should be able to pick out the correct answer because only
one of the statements below is a law, the others are conclusions or analysis.
a.

If the contract is
silent about delivery of the goods, then the goods are to be picked up by the
buyer or renter.
b.

Rock On’s staff
member was legally required to pick up the equipment.
c.

Audio Master did
not breach the contract.
d.

Audio Master does
not owe Rock On any damages.
e.

Both C and D are
correct.

1 points
Question 12

Rock On, LLC
enters into a contract with Audio Master, LLC to lease certain audio equipment
for a rock concert. Everything was done by email and no one mentioned anything
about pick up or delivery of the equipment. On the day of the concert Rock On’s
manager calls Audio Master and asks when the equipment will be delivered.
Audio’s manager says, “Whenever you come by to get it, it is ready”. Rock On
sends one of the staff to pick up the equipment. Both parties agree they have a
contract and that the above is exactly what happened.

Rock On wants to
sue Audio Master for breach of the contract because Rock On thinks Audio Master
was legally required to deliver the equipment.

Wk06.UCC.. Rock
On. LAST. Same as above. This question can only be answered correctly if you
have chosen the correct answer to the question asking what is the applicable
law.

Question: What is
the conclusion to the value issue given the law?
a.

If the contract is
silent about delivery of the goods, then the goods are to be picked up by the
buyer or renter.
b.

Rock On’s staff
member was legally required to pick up the equipment.
c.

Audio Master did
not breach the contract.
d.

Audio Master does
not owe Rock On any damages.
e.

Both C and D are
correct.

1 points
Question 13

In the video the
long contract example involved a contract dated 1918 with Babe Ruth.

True

False

1 points (Extra Credit)

Question 14

Click on
agreements are valid.

True

False

1 points
Question 15

In order for a
contract to form the parties have to exchange something.

True

False

1 points
Question 16

A seller’s price
list is not an offer.

True

False

1 points
Question 17

Dave’s uncle tells
Dave that if “he feels that Dave deserves it,” he will give Dave
$1,000 when Dave graduates from college. Dave’s uncle’s promise is
a.
illusory.
b.
enforceable.
c.
apreexisting duty.
d.
a forbearance.

1 points
Question 18

Mary admires
Julia’s collection of scarves. Julia says, “I might sell you a few
someday, if I get tired of them.” Julia’s statement is
a.
an acceptance.
b.
not an effective offer because it has not been communicated
to Mary.
c.
an effective offer.
d.
not an effective offer because the Julia does not show a
serious intent to be bound.

1 points
Question 19

The only
requirement for a valid contract is that the parties voluntarily entered into
it.

True

False

1 points
Question 20

A shrink-wrap
agreement is an agreement whose terms are expressed inside a box in which the
goods are packaged.

True

False

1 points
Question 21

Not all of the
terms presented in shrink-wrap agreements have been enforced.

True

False

1 points
Question 22

Kingston promises
to pay Melina $500 to install a sump pump in his warehouse. Melina completes
the installation. The act of installing the pump
a.
is not sufficient consideration because it is not goods or
money.
b.
imposes no obligation on Kingston unless he is satisfied
with the job.
c.
is the consideration that creates Kingston’s obligation to
pay Melina.
d.
imposes a moral obligation on Kingston to pay Melina.

1 points
Question 23

A forum-selection
clause indicates the forum, or location, for the delivery of goods purchased
online.

True

False

1 points
Question 24

A release does not
require consideration to be legally binding.

True

False

1 points
Question 25

Holiday Sales
Company and Global Distributors, Inc., enter into a contract for the delivery
of imported specialty goods. Until the goods are delivered and paid for, these
parties have
a.
no contract.
b.
an executory contract.
c.
an informal contract.
d.
aquasi contract.

1 points
Question 26

A quasi contract
is not a true contract.

True

False

1 points
Question 27

Livewire Company
and McCoy’s Candy, Inc., sign a document that states Livewire agrees to design
a Web page for McCoy’s, which agrees to pay for the service. This is
a.
an implied contract.
b.
an express contract.
c.
no contract.
d.
aquasi contract.

1 points
Question 28

Fresh Fast
Service, Inc., offers to deliver produce to Growers’ Market’s customers for a
certain price. Fresh’s intent to extend a serious offer to Growers’ Market is
determined by reference to
a.
what a reasonable person in Growers’ position would conclude
Fresh’s words and actions meant.
b.
Fresh’s beliefs.
c.
Fresh’s
intentions.
d.
Fresh’s
assumptions.

1 points
Question 29

Under the Uniform
Electronic Transactions Act, a typed name at the end of an email message is not
considered an e-signature.

True

False

1 points
Question 30

Wilson buys a
lottery ticket at his local gas station. Wilson has accepted an offer for a(n)
a.
unilateral contract.
b.
unenforceable contract.
c.
bilateral contract.
d.
void contract.

1 points
Question 31

The agreement
resulting from a buyer clicking on a box containing the words “I
agree” is known as a click-on agreement.

True

False

1 points
Question 32

Deb buys a song
through eSongs, an online music vendor. Before completing the purchase and
downloading the song, Deb must agree to a provision stating that she will not
make and sell copies of the song. This provision is
a.
a browse-wrap term.
b.
a click-on agreement.
c.
a shrink-wrap agreement.
d.
a wrap-on agreement.

1 points
Question 33

Bluebonnet #1:
Bluebonnet Lighting and Power Company sent a fancy brochure and cover letter to
real estate developers that said “We will install, for developers of single
family dwellings along Meridian Rd. between Hwy. 20 and Blue Grass, residential
electrical service for a construction charge of only $500 between 1/1/xx and
12/31/xx.” Zoning along Meridian Road requires homes with a minimum of one
acre. Also, the normal price for this service is $1,500 per home or unit to be
hooked up to electrical service.

A mobile home park
developer called up Bluebonnet and accepted the offer for ten units, giving
Bluebonnet no details. The representative of Bluebonnet said, “Thank you and we
are looking forward to seeing your plans.” When the plans arrived Bluebonnet
discovered that the project was for a mobile home park with 10 units to be one
acre and the parcel was located near Hwy 20 but not on Meridian Rd. Bluebonnet refused to supply the residential
electrical service without construction charge claiming no contract had been
formed. The mobile home park developer sued for breach of contract.

What fact supports
the legal conclusion that no acceptance exists?
a.
The acceptance did
not mirror the offer.
b.
The project sent
to Bluebonnet by developer was for a mobile home park with 10 units.
c.
In order to be a
valid acceptance, the acceptance must mirror the offer.
d.
The representative
of Bluebonnet said, “Thank you and we are looking forward to seeing your
plans.”

1 points
Question 34

Bluebonnet
Lighting and Power Company sent a fancy brochure and cover letter to real
estate developers that said “We will install, for developers of single family
dwellings along Meridian Rd. between Hwy. 20 and Blue Grass, residential
electrical service for a construction charge of only $500 between 1/1/xx and
12/31/xx.” Zoning along Meridian Road requires homes with a minimum of one
acre. Also, the normal price for this service is $1,500 per home or unit to be
hooked up to electrical service.

A mobile home park
developer called up Bluebonnet and accepted the offer for ten units, giving
Bluebonnet no details. The representative of Bluebonnet said, “Thank you and we
are looking forward to seeing your plans.” When the plans arrived Bluebonnet
discovered that the project was for a mobile home park with 10 units to be one
acre and the parcel was located near Hwy 20 but not on Meridian Rd. Bluebonnet refused to supply the residential
electrical service without construction charge claiming no contract had been
formed. The mobile home park developer sued for breach of contract.

Bluebonnet (test).
Assume an offer exists. The law that is required to be used to find an offer
is:___________exists?
a.

An offer is an
expression of a willingness to enter into a contract.
b.

A detailed
brochure with specific information such as location, price, and dates.
c.

A contract is
formed if there is an offer, an acceptance, consideration, and in some
circumstances a signed writing is needed.
d.

Bluebonnet
Lighting and Power has expressed a willingness to enter into a contract.

1 points
Question 35

Bluebonnet
Lighting and Power Company sent a fancy brochure and cover letter to real
estate developers that said “We will install, for developers of single family
dwellings along Meridian Rd. between Hwy. 20 and Blue Grass, residential
electrical service for a construction charge of only $500 between 1/1/xx and
12/31/xx.” Zoning along Meridian Road requires homes with a minimum of one
acre. Also, the normal price for this service is $1,500 per home or unit to be
hooked up to electrical service.

A mobile home park
developer called up Bluebonnet and accepted the offer for ten units, giving
Bluebonnet no details. The representative of Bluebonnet said, “Thank you and we
are looking forward to seeing your plans.” When the plans arrived Bluebonnet
discovered that the project was for a mobile home park with 10 units to be one
acre and the parcel was located near Hwy 20 but not on Meridian Rd. Bluebonnet refused to supply the residential
electrical service without construction charge claiming no contract had been
formed. The mobile home park developer sued for breach of contract.

Bluebonnet (test).
The issue in this problem is not whether there has been an offer, but whether
there has been ____________.
a.

writing
b.

consideration
c.

an acceptance
d.

adequate performance of the contract

1 points

Click Save and Submit to save and submit. Click Save All
Answers to save all answers.