1. Change the hypothetical. Bob and Susan agree that she can buy the car for $30,000. Bob refuses to honor the deal and she sues. Discovery indicates that Susan has 30 witnesses who will testify that the parties orally agreed to the deal. In fact, there was no writing. Bob has five witnesses who will testify that the parties never even orally agreed. Bob moves for summary judgment, based on the statute of frauds: this kind of contract (for the sale of goods over $500) must be in writing to be enforceable. The ruling?
2. Is it good to allow lawyers to challenge jurors?