Should we get rid of pseudo contract theories?

Consider promissory estoppel and quasi-contracts.Do you like the fact that these doctrines exist?Should courts have "wiggle room" to enforce deals that fail to meet formal contract requirements.Or, should the rule be, "If it's not an actual contract, too bad.No deal."

Should we stick to JUST UCC or Common Law for contracts but not both?

Is it sensible to have two different sets of contract rules - one for sales of goods and another for everything else? Would it be better to have a single set of rules for all contracts? Why do you think we have two sets of rules in the first place?