Which one of the following statements is true regarding the traditional approaches to prospective inability and unwillingness to perform a contractual obligation?

| March 14, 2016

Which one of the following statements is true regarding the traditional approaches to prospective inability and unwillingness to perform a contractual obligation? A If the words or conduct of one party to a contract suggests they will not perform, the other party to the contract has a legal justification to cancel the contract. B If the words or conduct of one party to a contract suggests they will not perform, the other party is has a legal justification for detrimental reliance on that conduct. C If the words or conduct of one party to a contract show their unequivocal unwillingness to perform, the other party has a legal justification to cancel the contract. D If one party to a contract repudiates their contractual obligation but substantial performance by that repudiating party is still likely, the other party cannot suspend performance. Based upon Problem 45, Chapter 8, Section 10, page 520 of your casebook, for how much may plaintiff recover judgment? A For the entire total of $37,500. B At plaintiff’s election, $37,500 or $5,000. C For the $5,000 already paid plus the $5,000 installment due. D Only for the $5,000 installment due. Regarding prospective inability and unwillingness to perform, which of the following statements is true? A The aggrieved party is not allowed to suspend performance. B The UCC allows the non-repudiating party to make a demand for adequate assurances of due performance on the repudiating party. C The Restatement (Second) adopts an identical adequate assurances right as does the UCC. D The Restatement (First) allows the non-repudiating party to make a demand for adequate assurances of due performance on the repudiating party. Assume Bob has agreed to personally construct a fence for Jan on March 1. Which of the following is the best supports a finding that Bob’s conduct would be deemed prospective inability to perform? A Bob received word that if he provided care for his elderly uncle who lives in a distant city from February 28 to March 30, he would receive a large inheritance. Bob told Jan of this offer and then left to care for his uncle. B On February 28, Bob said to Jan, “I think I am coming down with a cold and may not be able to build your fence.” C On March 1, after Bob began construction of the fence, Bob said to Jan, “It is too cold to build your fence right now.” D Bob is severely injured on February 28 and cannot work for 30 days. Regarding anticipatory repudiation, which one of the following statements is correct? A Not every prospective unwillingness to perform amounts to an anticipatory repudiation. B A statement to the obligee indicating that the promisor will commit a minor breach of contract is an anticipatory repudiation. C Any voluntary act that renders even less than substantial performance of the promisor’s duties impossible to perform is an anticipatory repudiation. D Transferring to a third party an interest in specific land that is essential to specific performance of an existing contract is not an anticipatory repudiation. Regarding retractions of a repudiation, which one of the following statements is correct? A The common law rule is that an anticipatory repudiation cannot be retracted. B Under the UCC, a retraction of repudiation can always be made. C The UCC rule is that until the repudiating party’s next performance is due he can retract his repudiation unless the aggrieved party has since repudiation cancelled or materially changed his position or otherwise indicated that he considers the repudiation final. D At common law rule is that because there is no retraction available, the repudiation is always a breach. Regarding the doctrine of repudiation, which one of the following statements is correct? A The majority view is that a good faith refusal to perform is not a repudiation. B An offer to perform under a misinterpretation of the contract will generally constitute and unequivocal repudiation. C Insistence on a contractual misinterpretation is not a repudiation. D The prevailing view is that the good faith of the repudiator is immaterial. Regarding appropriate responses to an anticipatory repudiation, which of the following is not correct? A The UCC specifically states that the non-repudiating party may always resort to any remedy for breach even though he has notified the repudiating party that he would await performance and has urged retraction. B Where a party has repudiated and the aggrieved party has then urged the repudiating party to perform, the UCC provides that the aggrieved party must wait for at least 30 days prior to bringing suit. C The non-repudiating party may bring an immediate action for a total breach. D The non-repudiating party may urge the repudiating party to retract the repudiation. In which case follow the rule that the government need not prove an express agreement between the alleged conspirators in order to prove the necessary agreement existed? A United States v. Feola B People v. Lauria C United States v. James D Mitchell v. State Which one of the following statements is not correct regarding how the conduct of a supplier can be used to establish the supplier’s participation in a conspiracy with the buyers of the supplies? A Intent may be inferred from knowledge when no legitimate use for the goods or services exits. B Intent may not be established through an inference that he intends to participate based on his special interest in the activity. C Intent may be inferred from knowledge when the purveyor of legal goods for illegal use has acquired a stake in the venture. D Intent may established by direct evidence that he intends to participate in the criminal activity connected to his supplies. In which case did the court agree with a prior decision that the intent required to commit a conspiracy to commit murder is also sufficient to show the premeditation and deliberation element of first degree murder? A Mitchell v. State B People v. Lauria C State v. St. Christopher D United States v. James Under the Model Penal Code, which one of the following statements is correct regarding conspiracy? A If a person guilty of conspiracy knows that a person with whom he conspires has conspired with another person(s) to commit the same crime, he is guilty of conspiring with such other person(s) to commit such crime, whether or not he knows their identity. B A conspirator who abandons the agreement does not need to inform co- conspirators or law enforcement to be deemed to have terminated the conspiracy. C If the conspiracy is to commit a felony, no overt act is needed to prove the conspiracy. D Due to the nature of conspiracy, co-conspirators may not be prosecuted jointly. Which one of the following statements is not a reason that conspiracy is often referred to as the prosecution’s advantage? A There are ambiguities that compound the difficulties of defending a conspiracy charge. B. Conspiracy is the one crime that does not require the prosecution to prove both an act and mental state. C Statements made by the defendants can be admitted into evidence despite the fact that the statements were made prior to the formation of the conspiracy or after its termination. D Venue need be established only by a preponderance of the evidence. In conspiracy trials A circumstantial evidence is not usually admitted. B joint defendants have an advantage over the prosecution. C most convictions are based on circumstantial evidence. D the hearsay exception requirement requiring that the act or statement be in furtherance of the conspiracy is narrowly applied. Which one of the following statements is not correct regarding the mental state requirement of conspiracy? A It must be established that the several parties intended to agree. B The defendant must have the intent to achieve a particular result that is criminal, or non-criminal but nonetheless covered by conspiracy law. C It is necessary to determine what objective the parties intended to achieve in their agreement. D A common purpose among the conspirators to achieve an objective is not necessary. The “Corrupt Motive Doctrine” A has been rejected by nearly all courts. B has created confusion concerning the mens rea requirements of conspiracy. C states that an “evil purpose” is not necessary for conspiracy. D has been an ineffective defense for druggists. In which case did the court hold that a conspiracy may exist where one of the two conspirators only pretended to agree to commit the illegal objective? A State v. St. Christopher B United States v. James C State v. Baca D United States v. Feola

Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code: ESSAYHELP
Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code: ESSAYHELPOrder Now