1. Esposito hired Excel Construction Company to repair a porch roof for $ 625 while she was out of town on vacation. All terms of the agreement were specified in a written contract, but the agreement failed to specify whether it was the front or rear porch that needed repair. When Esposito returned, she discovered that Excel had repaired the rear porch roof. She refused to pay, claiming that she wanted the front porch roof repaired. Were all essential elements of a contract present, and will Esposito be required to pay for the work that was done?
2. William Storey Sr. promised his nephew, William Storey II, that he would pay him $ 5,000 if his nephew avoided drinking, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards and billiards for money until he became 21 years old. The nephew agreed to the offer and kept his part of the bargain. At the age of 21, he wrote to his uncle and asked for the $ 5,000. The uncle acknowledged the promise, praised his nephew for keeping his part of the bargain, but did not pay the money at that time. A short time later, the uncle died. The executor of his estate refused to pay the nephew, claiming that the contract was invalid due to the lack of consideration. Was the nephew’s promise to avoid drinking, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards and billiards for money until he became 21 legal considerations?
3. Hodge, a 54-year-old employee of a bank, discussed his job and future with Tilley, president of Evans Financial Corporation and his employer. They agreed orally on a number of matters, including job title and location. After eight months on the new job, Tilley became dissatisfied with Hodge’s work and discharged him. Hodge immediately sued, claiming that the oral agreement provided for employment until he retired at age 65. Does the length of time needed to fulfill the contract have a bearing on the enforceability of the contract?
4. Grogan, a marketing consultant, was hired by Kreger Bottling Company to conduct market research into the taste preferences of consumers in a major city. Before he concluded the project, he was asked to take on the additional task of analyzing the appeal of various shapes of bottles that Kreger was considering for a new line of soft drinks. When the taste test was finished, but before the second project was completed, Grogan submitted his bill for the taste test. Kreger refused to pay until the bottle test was completed. Does Grogan have a basis for demanding payment for the portion of the work done?