FL Contracts Flashcards
Which of the following states the legal test for discharge by impracticability in Florida?
A The circumstances causing the breach have made performance vitally different from what was anticipated.
B The party to perform faced extreme difficulty in performing the contract.
C The party to perform would have incurred unreasonable expense in fulfilling the contractual obligations.
D There was an event, the nonoccurrence of which, was an assumption of the parties.
A The circumstances causing the breach have made performance vitally different from what was anticipated.
Florida’s test for the doctrine of impracticability is that circumstances causing the breach would make performance vitally different from what was anticipated at the time of contracting, so that the contract cannot reasonably be thought to govern. This deviates from the two-prong test, followed by the majority of jurisdictions, that (i) the person to perform has encountered extreme and unreasonable difficulty and/or expense AND (ii) its nonoccurrence was a basic assumption of the parties.
To be enforceable, certain agreements must be in writing and signed by the party to be bound. Which of the following statements concerning the Florida Statute of Frauds is TRUE?
A Both a gym membership and a newspaper subscription must be in writing
B Neither a promise in consideration of marriage nor a 6-month lease need be in writing
C Both a credit agreement and a contract for the sale of goods in excess of $500 must be in writing
D Neither an agreement to pay the debt of another nor home solicitation sales need be in writing
C Both a credit agreement and a contract for the sale of goods in excess of $500 must be in writing
Both a credit agreement and a contract for the sale of goods in excess of $500 both must be in writing. The Florida Statute of Frauds also requires newspaper subscriptions, promises in consideration of marriage, agreements to pay the debt of another, and home solicitation sales, among several other categories of contracts, to be in writing in order to be enforceable. The Statute of Frauds does not require a writing for gym memberships or short-term leases under one year.
To be enforceable, all of the following agreements must be in writing EXCEPT:
A A contract for photography at a wedding six months from now.
B A subscription to the Wall Street Journal.
C A contract for a kitchen renovation.
D A dentist’s promise that a tooth implant will be successful.
A A contract for photography at a wedding six months from now.
A contract with a wedding photographer need not be in writing. Contracts for services that cannot be performed within one year must be in writing to be enforceable. A contract for the services of a photographer for a single event six months from now does not fall within the Statute of Frauds. Under the Florida Statute of Frauds, other types of contracts that must be in writing and signed by the party to be charged include: (i) promises by an executor or administrator to pay estate debts; (ii) promises to pay the debt of another; (iii) promises made in consideration of marriage; (iv) interests in land; (v) leases for a period longer than one year; (vi) guaranteed results by health care providers; (vii) newspaper subscriptions; and (viii) home improvement contracts. Thus, a Wall Street Journal subscription, a contract for a kitchen renovation, and a dentist’s promise that a tooth implant will succeed are examples of contracts that must be in writing signed by the party to be charged.
A 17-year-old signs a contract for a series of 20 personal training sessions. After the third session, he decides not to continue. If the gym tries to enforce the contract, the minor can raise the defense of legal incapacity unless:
A He promised to pay for all sessions
B He promised that his mother would pay if he didn’t
C He told them he is 18 and produced fake ID as proof
D He never specifically mentioned his age but the gym assumed he was over 18
C He told them he is 18 and produced fake ID as proof
The minor cannot raise the defense of incapacity if he lied about his age in order to induce the gym to offer him the contract. A minor who fraudulently misrepresents that he has attained the age of majority in order to enter into a contract may be estopped from raising legal incapacity as a defense to enforcement of the contract. If he did not lie about his age, the defense of incapacity is available, unless other exceptions apply, and the contract cannot be enforced against him, regardless of any promises he made.
Two married 17-year-olds sign a contract to purchase a home. Can they later void the contract on the basis of incapacity?
A Yes, because minors may disaffirm their contracts.
B No, because marriage removes incapacity.
C Yes, because minors cannot purchase real estate.
D No, because 17 is the age of majority.
B No, because marriage removes incapacity.
Marriage removes legal incapacity. Therefore, contracts made by minors are not voidable on the basis of incapacity if the minors are married. Minors can enter into any contract, including a real estate contract–but married minors may not raise the defense of incapacity. The age of majority in Florida is 18.
Which of the following minors can raise a defense of incapacity to contract? Choose all that apply.
A A divorced minor
B An unmarried minor
C A married minor
D A widowed minor
B An unmarried minor
An unmarried minor can raise the defense of incapacity to contract. Marriage removes contractual incapacity and, once married, the minor is deemed to possess capacity to contract even if she later divorces or becomes widowed.
Which of the following correctly states the legal test applied by a Florida court to determine whether there was consideration?
A The promisee must suffer a legal detriment
B The promisor and promisee must bargain for and exchange promises
C Either the promisor or the promisee must receive a legal benefit or suffer a legal detriment
D Both the promisor and the promisee must suffer a legal detriment
C Either the promisor or the promisee must receive a legal benefit or suffer a legal detriment
Florida follows the minority rule under which consideration is given if there is either a benefit to one party or a detriment to the other. This is also the view set forth by the First Restatement. It is not necessary that the promisee in particular suffer the detriment, as is required under the majority rule, nor that both parties do. A bargain and exchange of promises, which is the rule promulgated in the Second Restatement, will not suffice as consideration under Florida law.
Which would NOT be a factor in considering whether a debt barred by the statute of limitations could be enforced:
A The debtor promises in a signed writing to pay the debt
B The debt would otherwise be enforceable if not for the running of the statute of limitations
C The amount of the debt
D A third person promises in a signed writing to pay the debt
C The amount of the debt
The amount of debt is not relevant in determining whether a debt barred by the statute of limitations can be enforced. To enforce such a debt, the person to be charged—either the debtor or another person—must agree in a signed writing to repay and the debt must not otherwise be unenforceable.
