Which of the following are exceptions to the Statute of Frauds quizlet?

Promises to pay the debt of another
Exception: The main purpose doctrine

Agreements of executor or administrator

Contracts in consideration of marriage

Contracts affecting an interest in real estate
Exception: the part performance doctrine

The one-year rule
Exception: the possibility test
If an agreement is possible to be performed within a year, it does not need to be in writing

Under the UCC
Contracts for the sale of goods in an amount greater than $500

Recommended textbook solutions

Human Resource Management

15th EditionJohn David Jackson, Patricia Meglich, Robert Mathis, Sean Valentine

249 solutions

HDEV5

6th EditionSpencer A. Rathus

380 solutions

Social Psychology

10th EditionElliot Aronson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers, Timothy D. Wilson

525 solutions

Information Technology Project Management: Providing Measurable Organizational Value

5th EditionJack T. Marchewka

346 solutions

Recommended textbook solutions

Myers' Psychology for AP

2nd EditionDavid G Myers

900 solutions

Introductory Business Statistics

1st EditionAlexander Holmes, Barbara Illowsky, Susan Dean

2,174 solutions

American Government

1st EditionGlen Krutz

412 solutions

Social Psychology

10th EditionElliot Aronson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers, Timothy D. Wilson

525 solutions

Recommended textbook solutions

Myers' Psychology for AP

2nd EditionDavid G Myers

900 solutions

Fundamentals of Engineering Economic Analysis

1st EditionDavid Besanko, Mark Shanley, Scott Schaefer

215 solutions

Social Psychology

10th EditionElliot Aronson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers, Timothy D. Wilson

525 solutions

The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography, AP Edition

13th EditionJames M. Rubenstein

216 solutions

Brandy, the president of ABC Communication., and Sam orally agreed that Sam would work as a computer programmer for ABC Co. for a three-year period. Their oral agreement also covered other matters such as his pay and the availability of one week of paid vacation. On the day he talked with Brandy, Sam signed an employee handbook including a provision that his employment was at will, meaning that at any time he could quit or the company could discharge him. A month later, Sam received a three-year contract for employment with ABC Co. in the mail incorporating the amount of his salary and other issues he had discussed with Brandy. Sam signed it and mailed it back, but he changed the vacation provision to three weeks instead of one week. Bobby, the human resources manager for ABC Co., called Sam up after Bobby received the agreement and told Sam that the contract was only a draft for discussion purposes and that he was actually firing Sam because he seemed too focused on vacation. Assuming the court follows the reasoning of the court in the dispute discussed in the text involving Michael Gallagher and Medical Research Consultants, which of the following would be the most likely result in the dispute between Sam and ABC Co. if Sam claims he had a three-year contract of employment?

A.
ABC Co. will win because even if a three-year oral agreement for employment was made, it would not have been enforceable because the statute of frauds requires that agreements that cannot be completed within one year be in writing. Further, the draft Sam returned was not signed by ABC Co.

B.
ABC Co. will win because although the three-year oral agreement for employment was initially enforceable, Sam reopened negotiations by altering the later contract to provide that he was to receive three weeks of vacation.

C.
ABC Co. will win because as a matter of law, no other document can alter the provisions of an employee handbook.

D.
A jury will decide if Brandy orally agreed to a three-year contract; and, if so, Sam gets his job back along with the extra weeks of vacation.

E.
As a matter of law, since the contract was sent to Sam, he received a guarantee of employment for three years; but he does not get the extra weeks of vacation he inserted.

"Not So Rich Uncle." Bruce is attempting to convince Sally to marry him. He promises her that if she will marry him, he will buy a new Mercedes automobile for her within six months of the marriage and take her on a world tour within a year of the marriage date. Sally reluctantly agrees, and they sign an agreement by which Bruce agrees to provide the Mercedes and world tour. Bruce and Sally marry on January 1. Unexpectedly, on March 1, Bruce's supposedly rich uncle, Frank, dies. Frank has no living relatives other than Bruce and has a will leaving everything to Bruce who is also appointed executor. In attempting to settle the estate, Bruce agrees orally to pay out of his own pocket debts of Frank totaling $10,000. Sally is concerned about Bruce's doing so. Bruce tells her not to worry because he will get all the money back when the estate settles. Bruce admits to a number of friends that he agreed to settle the debts out of his own pocket because he needed to obtain assets from the estate in a hurry and did not want anything to slow down probate. The assets were needed in large part to satisfy his obligations to Sally. Surprisingly, it later came to light that prior to his death Frank had signed away all his assets to his girlfriend in Argentina. There was nothing left in the estate for Bruce to inherit. Bruce disavowed his agreement to pay the $10,000 to various creditors of Frank.

"Courtroom Surprises." Wilma agrees to sell Wally her house for $200,000. Wilma, Wally, and the house are all located in Tennessee. She also orally agrees to sell her used car to Wally for $1,000. Wilma and Wally discuss the fact that the house needs some repairs. Wilma gives Wally a key and tells him to do whatever he wants with the house. In reliance on her promise to sell the house, Wally sells his home, gets a loan, and has a new roof put on Wilma's house because of leaks that needed to be repaired to prevent further damage. When presented with the written agreements of sale for the home and the car, however, Wilma refuses to sign either. Wally sues, and the case proceeds to trial. Wilma tells the judge in court under oath that she orally agreed to sell the house but that she changed her mind before signing and that she believes she has protection under the statute of frauds. She tells the judge that no agreement was ever made regarding the car and that she also has protection under the statute of frauds regarding that matter.

Which of the following is are exceptions to the Statute of Frauds?

These exceptions are admission, performance, and promissory estoppel. Admission means that an oral contract can be enforced without meeting the requirements of a statute of frauds if the other party admits under oath that the oral contract was made.

What are the three exceptions to the Statute of Frauds quizlet?

[1] The promise induces action or forbearance of action by another, [2] the reliance on the oral promise was foreseeable, and [3] injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the oral promise.

Which of the following is an exception to the Statute of Frauds requirement that sale of goods contracts be in writing quizlet?

40] The main purpose exception to the Statute of Frauds allows oral collateral contracts to be enforced if there is a monetary benefit to the guarantor. 41] Equal dignity rule says that agents' contracts to sell property covered by the Statute of Frauds must be in writing to be enforceable.

Which contract is not covered under the Statute of Frauds quizlet?

An oral contract that was required to be in writing pursuant to the Statute of Frauds is void. A promise made to a debtor to pay his debt, rather than to the creditor, is not within the Statute of Frauds.

Bài Viết Liên Quan

Chủ Đề