Mike orally hires Vonda to defame a local politician. Vonda does so and requests payment. Mike refuses to pay. Which of the following is true regarding the situation of the parties

Multiple Choice

• The agreement will be enforced because defamation is not an illegal offense for which someone would go to jail.
• The agreement will be enforced because regardless of whether or not the conduct is illegal, Vonda completed the contract and, between the two, is more entitled to the funds than is Mike.
• The agreement is unenforceable because a contract that cannot be performed without committing a tort is illegal.
• The agreement is unenforceable because a politician was the subject of the harmful conduct.

Which of the following generally happens when a minor lies about his or her age in order to convince an adult to enter into a contract?

Multiple Choice

• The court will hold the contract void.
• The court will hold the contract voidable by either the minor or the adult.
• The court will assign the contract to a conservator for renegotiation.
• The court will not allow the minor to defraud the adult.

When Beatrice turns back the odometer on the van she is trying to sell, she is guilty of:

Multiple Choice

• fraud.
• misrepresentation.
• silent inducement.
• caveat emptor.

A revenue-raising statute:

Multiple Choice

• is designed to protect the public; and, if violated by a party to a contract, results in the contract being unenforceable.
• is designed to protect the public; but, if violated, will not result in a finding of illegality.
• is not designed to protect the public; and, if violated by a party to a contract, results in the contract being unenforceable.
• is not designed to protect the public; and, if violated, will not result in a finding of illegality.

Which of the following was the result in Hi-Tec Properties, LLC v. Murphy, the case in the text in which tenants sued for damages after being exposed to mold in an apartment, and the landlord defended on the basis of an exculpatory clause in the lease stating that the lessor had no injury for liability based on mold?

Multiple Choice

• That the exculpatory clause was void as against public policy.
• That the exculpatory clause was allowable because the tenants signed it of their own free will.
• That the exculpatory clause was void because the landlord affirmatively acted to disclose the presence of mold.
• That the exculpatory clause was voidable by the tenants only in the event that they could establish serious medical harm from the presence of the mold.