1
answer
0
watching
165
views

1.(Please Note: There may be more than one correct answer)

If Peggy says to Larry, "I'll give you $50 if you stand on your head for one hour":

a.

Larry must verbalize his assent in order to render effective acceptance.

b.

The statement can form the basis for a unilateral contract.

c.

Larry must stand on his head to accept Peggy's offer.

d.

Peggy and Larry have created a contigent cont

2. An acceptance is effective as soon as it is dispatched if the offeree uses:

a.

any reasonable means of communication.

b.

only a stipulated means of communication.

c.

only an authorized means of communication.

d.

an authorized as well as the stipulated means of communication.

3.Under the UCC, an order requesting "prompt" shipment of goods:

a.

impliedly invites acceptance only by a prompt promise to ship.

b.

invites acceptance by either a prompt promise to ship or by prompt shipment of goods.

c.

requires acceptance via writing within a "reasonable" time frame.

d.

impliedly invites acceptance only by a prompt shipment of goods.

4. (Please Note: There may be more than one correct answer)

On February 21, 2012, Stateville College President Erhlich sent a letter to Lt Governor Alfred E. Neuman asking Neuman to speak at theStateville College commencement on the topic "Do Brains and Politics Mix?" On February 24, Neuman responded in a fax, "I'll speak if you will pay a $50,000 speaking fee." On February 25, President Erhlich heard Neuman say something unintelligent on the morning news program and sent an email to Neuman which said "I revoke my offer for you to speak at commencement." Ten minutes later, Neumanchecked his email on his smartphone, and five minutes after that Neuman called Erhlich and said, "I've changed my mind. I accept your offer and I'll be glad to speak for free." Which of the following is a correct statement of the law?

a.

Neuman's fax was a counter-offer which terminated Ehrlich's offer.

b.

If Neuman's February 24 fax can be viewed as an inquiry rather than a counter-offer, and Ehrlich had received Neuman's call before Neuman received Ehrlich's email, Ehrlich would have been bound to a contract with Neuman despite his attempt to revoke because his revocation would only have been efffective when received by Neuman.

c.

Under these circumstances, Ehrlich had no right to revoke his offer at any time before receiving Neuman's call.

d.

Even if Neuman had phoned to accept before reading Erhlich's email, no contract would have formed because the February 25 email was not effective to revoke the offer made on February 21.

5. Browse wrap agreements are:

a.

in paper form.

b.

viewed by some courts as voidable.

c.

per se illegal.

d.

viewed by some courts as illegal.

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

Paramjeet Chawla
Paramjeet ChawlaLv8
28 Sep 2019

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.
Already have an account? Log in
Start filling in the gaps now
Log in