23. Victoria entered into a written agreement with Samuel for the purchase and sale of a house. The agreement stated: "This contract is contingent upon buyer being able to obtain a mortgage loan in the amount of $50,000." Victoria was about to start the process of applying for the mortgage loan when Samuel decided to sue her and seek a declaratory judgment that the alleged contract was void as Victoria's promise was illusory. Victoria, he argues, can effectively defeat the alleged "contract" by failing to seek out mortgage financing. What result is most likely?

• A.The court will declare that the financing condition is void, because it is akin to an option and lacks consideration.
• B.The court will declare the contract to be illusory, because of the uncertainty that the loan will be granted.
• C.The court will declare that the contract is illusory, because it does not expressly state that Victoria is obligated to apply for a mortgage loan
• D.The court will declare that the contract is valid, because there is an implied term in the contract that Victoria will use good faith and reasonable efforts to meet the express condition for financing.

24. Smith runs a bicycle shop. Jones approaches Smith about buying a bike, and says he wants to buy a bike to ride in the mountains. Smith recommends a bike to Jones, and Jones decides to buy it on the spot based on Smith's recommendation. When Jones rides the bike in the mountains, however, it cannot handle the steep trails and is ruined. The bike that Smith purchased was actually designed to be ridden only on paved roads. Jones sues Smith for breach of warranty. What is the most likely result?

• A.Jones will win, because the bike was not fit for his particular purpose
• B.Jones will win, because the bike is not fit for its ordinary purpose
• C.Smith will win, because he is not a merchant.
• D.Jones will win, because Smith made a statement of fact that created an express warranty that was breached when the bike broke.

25. Jerry has a valid and enforceable contract with Bronson to sell his farm. The contract states that Bronson must pay $100,000 on February 1. Bronson, however, does not pay anything to Jerry on February 1. Bronson promises to pay the money within the next few weeks. Crops must be planted by March, or the farm will not operate for the entire year. On February 20, Jerry sells the farm to Tom for $100,000. Which of the following is true?

• A.Bronson breached the contract and must pay Jerry damages for emotional distress and attorneys' fees
• B.Jerry did not breach the contract by selling the farm to Bronson, because Tom's failure to pay was a total breach
• C.Bronson breached the contract and must pay Jerry $100,000
• D.Jerry breached the contract by selling the farm to Bronson when he had a contract with Bronson

26. Aunt Rose is rich and loves her nephew Peter, who is 7 years old. Aunt Rose tells Peter, in the presence of Peter's mother Mary, that she would like to do something special for little Peter. Aunt Rose promptly pulls out a written letter which reads "for consideration received . . . I hereby promise to pay $10,000 to Peter upon my death." Although this letter contained the language "for consideration received", neither Peter, nor his mother Mary, made any promises or paid any money to Aunt Rose in exchange for her promise. Aunt Rose gives the letter to her nephew Peter. His mother Mary puts the letter in the family safe for him. A year later Aunt Rose dies. Peter's mother approaches the executor of Aunt Rose's estate armed with the letter in attempt to receive the $10,000 on behalf of Peter. Aunt Rose's estate refuses to pay. A court will most likely hold that:

• A.Peter will receive the money because the note expressly stated that the money was promised "for consideration received"
• B.Peter will receive the money under promissory estoppel
• C.Peter will not receive the money because it was an executory gift.
• D.Peter will receive the money because a bargained-for exchange occurred between him and Aunt Rose.

27. Seller agrees to sell 100 cameras to Buyer. The contract calls for the cameras to be delivered on July 1st to Buyer's house, and Buyer is to pay $50 per camera for a total of $5,000 on the date of delivery. On July 1st, Seller shows up at Buyer's house. Buyer tells Seller that she will not pay for the cameras, which is an anticipatory repudiation by Buyer. The market value of 100 cameras is $4,500. Seller advertises the cameras on various reputable websites to try and sell them. After one week, someone finally contacts her and offers to buy the cameras for $40 per camera, totaling $4,000. Seller sells the cameras to the new buyer. If Seller sues Buyer for breach, what result?

• A.Seller should get zero damages because one week was an unreasonably long delay for Seller to find another buyer.
• B.Seller should get $1,000 in damages because that is the contract price less the resale price.
• C.Seller should get $500 in damages because that is the market price less the resale price.
• D.Seller should get $5,000 in damages because that is what she expected to receive from Buyer.

28. Andy offers to deliver to Bob at $60 a barrel as many barrel of oil, not exceeding 5,000, as Bob may choose to order within the next 30 days. Bob accepts, agreeing to buy at that price as much as he shall order from Andy within that time. Has a contract been formed?

• A.Yes, because the UCC governs the contract
• B.Yes, because of the duty of good faith and faith dealing
• C.Yes, because Bob accepted Andy's offer
• D.No, because consideration is lacking

29. John and Daniel enter into a contract for the renovation of John's home. The parties orally agree that Daniel will renovate John's kitchen and bathroom for $30,000. The parties then draft and sign a writing stating only that Daniel will renovate John's kitchen for $30,000. Which of the following is true?

• A.If the court finds that the contract is "partially integrated," John may not offer evidence to show that the parties agreed that Daniel would renovate both the kitchen and the bathroom
• B.If the court finds that the writing is "totally integrated," John may offer evidence to show that the parties agreed that Daniel would renovate both the kitchen and the bathroom
• C.If the court finds that the writing is "totally integrated," John may not offer evidence to show that the parties agreed that Daniel would renovate both the kitchen and the bathroom
• D.There are no conditions under which John may offer evidence to show that the parties agreed that Daniel would renovate both the kitchen and the bathroom

30. Smith is about to start up a business as a tour guide. Smith knows that Jones is thinking about setting up a similar business. Smith pays Jones $5,000 in exchange for Jones's promise not to start his own business as a tour guide. Which of the following is true?

• A.The contract is enforceable if it is reasonable in scope
• B.The contract is enforceable unless it violates a public policy announced in a state or local statute
• C.The contract is unenforceable because it is against public policy
• D.The contract is unenforceable because it is unconscionable