ADMS 2610 Lecture 8: Chapter 13

20 views6 pages

silverwallaby916

30 Sep 2015

School

York University

Department

Administrative Studies

Course

ADMS 2610

Professor

Richard Gasparini

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Or the agreement is discharged in another way: tender the act of performing a contract or the offer of payment of money due under a contract, tender of payment, tender of performance of an act. Tender of payment: buyer"s performance is when payment is offered to the seller at the required time and place fixed for delivery under the contract. Legal tender cannot be refused when offered in payment, providing that it is the exact amount required. If form of payment is not specified legal tender or currency: unless specified, checks, bill of exchange, credit card or others cannot be accepted. If creditor is unwilling to accept payment, the debtor need not attempt payment again: the debtor is not free of the debt, needs to hold the amount of the debt until the creditor later demands payment. If the contract concerns land: seller is unwilling to deliver the deed, purchaser can bring it to court.

Related Questions

Moore contracted in writing to sell her 2012 Hyundai Santa Fe to Hammer for $16,500. Moore agreed to deliver the car on Wednesday, and Hammer promised to pay the $16,500 on the following Friday. On Tuesday, Hammer informed Moore that he would not be buying the car after all. By Friday, Hammer had changed his mind again and tendered $16,500 to Moore. Moore, although she had not sold the car to another party, refused the tender and refused to deliver. Hammer claimed that Moore had breached their contract. Moore contended that Hammer's repudiation released her from her duty to perform under the contract.

Before either party to the contract had a duty to perform, Hammer informed Moore that he would not be carrying out his contractual obligation. This is known as ________of the contract.

a. anticipatory repudiation

b. mutual rescission

c. specific performance

Anticipatory repudiation of the contract is considered a _______of the contract.

a. material breach

b. waiver of breach

c. mutual rescission

Because of the material breach, Moore would be_____ from the contract.

a. discharged

b. not discharged

Once Hammer repudiated the contract, Moore had which of the following options (in addition to the ability to suspend her own performance)?

1- _____________________

a. pursue a remedy for the breach

b. modify the written contract in her favor

2- _____________________

a. modify the written contract in her favor

b. wait for performance by Hammer

Moore, as the non-breaching party to the contract, may file suit:

a. when her interest vests.

b. when she is scheduled to perform under the contract.

c. immediately.

Could Moore have sold the vehicle to another individual after Hammer's repudiating of the contract and prior to Hammer's retraction?

a. Yes

b. No

Moore did not take any action between the time Hammer repudiated the contract on Tuesday and the time he retracted his repudiation on Friday. What are the consequences of Moore's inaction?
a. None, Moore is the non-breaching party and the contract is discharged.

b. None, Moore has discretion to discharge or reinstate the contract.

c. Moore is obligated under the terms of the original contract because of Hammer's retraction.

Would a court likely find for Moore or Hammer under these facts?

a. Moore

b. Hammer

((( What if the facts were different?)))

Assume that on Wednesday Moore provide a written notice to Hammer indicating that the repudiation was final and that Moore was seeking another buyer for the vehicle. Would a court find for Moore or Hammer under these facts?

a. Moore

b. Hammer

orchideagle521

CH22_Blueprint_Performance_of_Sales_Contracts_-_Assurance

Flint Hills Resources, LP, a crude oil refiner, agreed to buy "approximately 1,000 barrels per day" of Mexican natural gas condensate from JAG Energy, Inc., an oil broker. Four months into the contract, Pemex, the only authorized seller of freshly extracted Mexican condensate, warned Flint Hills that some companies might be selling stolen Mexican condensate. Fearing potential criminal liability, Flint Hills refused to accept more deliveries from JAG without proof of the title to its product. JAG promised to forward documents showing its chain of title. After several weeks, when JAG did not produce the documents, Flint Hills canceled their agreement. JAG filed a suit in a federal district court against Flint Hills, alleging breach of contract.

What is the name of the law that applies to the duties and obligations of parties to a sale of goods contract?

a. Uniform Transactions Code

b. Uniform Sales Code

c. Uniform Commercial Code

d. Uniform Goods Code

Who is the seller?

a. Flint Hills Resources

b. JAG Energy

Who is the buyer?

a. Flint Hills Resources

b. JAG Energy

The seller's obligation is to tender

a. perfect good

b. conforming goods

c. reasonably perfect goods

d. adequately conforming goods

This rule is called the

a. confirmation rule

b. good faith rule

c. perfect tender rule

d. reasonable tender rule

Is JAG Energy potentially not tendering conforming natural gas condensate?

a. Yes

b. No

What might be the problem with the tender?

a. the goods are stolen

b. the goods might be stolen

c. there is no problem as there is no proof

What exception to the perfect tender rule arises here?

a. the parties agreed to waive any criminal implications

b. the parties agreed that using a different carrier was acceptable

c. the parties agreed to accept a nonconforming installment

d. an occurrence unforeseen by either party is making performance commercially impracticable

e. one party has reasonable grounds to believe the other party will not perform

f. one party is refusing to cooperate

Does this particular exception apply equally to both the buyer and seller?

a. Yes

b. No

Who is worried about performance in this case?

a. buyer

b. seller

What section of the UCC applies when one party believes the other will not perform?

a. 2-311

b. 2-609

c. 2-615

d. 2-613

Does UCC 2â609 state that if a contracting party has "reasonable grounds" to believe that the other party will not perform, he or she may "demand adequate assurance" of that performance?

a. Yes

b. No

Does the buyer, Flint, have reasonable grounds to believe the natural gas condensate to be delivered by JAG may be stolen?

a. Yes

b. No

Why? Pemex ______ the only authorized seller of natural gas condensate.

a. is

b. is not

After asking for assurance from JAG, how many days does Flint have to wait before a non-response from JAG may be considered a repudiation of the contract?

a. 14

b. 30

c. 60

d. 90

Does Flint have to keep making payments while they wait?

a. Yes

b. No

Did JAG ever produce proof of title for the natural gas condensate?

a. Yes

b. No

How long did Flint wait?

a. several weeks

b. a few weeks

c. eight weeks

Assume Flint waited more than 30 days. Would UCC2-609 apply?

a. Yes

b. No

Under the UCC2-609, did Flint have a right to cancel the contract?

a. Yes

b. No

((What if the facts were different?))

What if Flint had heard about this allegation of stolen natural gas from someone other than Pemex- would their demand for assurance be justified?

a. Yes

b. No

Why? The information from any other source would be

a. reasonable grounds

b. unreasonable grounds

chocolateferret211

1. The Winklers were interested in purchasing a home in the Valleyview Farms housing development. They contracted the developer, Galehouse, and selected a lot that cost $57,000. They asked the developer to show them plans for houses for which the construction costs would range from $1800,000 to 190,000, indicating that this was the price they would be willing to spend on construction only and wasnât to include the lot price. The developer gave them several books and plans to look at. After the Winklers had several conversations with Galehouse, he drafted plans for a house and gave the Winklers a quote of $198,000 for the construction costs. The lot price was not included. After several weeks of negotiations, the parties agreed on a price of $291,000 for both the construction costs and the lot. Galehouse prepared a written contract to reflect the agreement of the parties, but he forgot to include the lot price. The final contract read âprice for $198,000.â The Winklers paid Galehouse $57,000, the lot price, as a down payment. When the construction was completed, and the Winklers were finalizing their loan from the bank, the parties discovered the error in the contract. The Winklerâs argued that the written contract indicated total costs of $198,000, and that is the total amount they should pay. Galehouse sued to have the contract reformed to reflect the full agreed upon price of $291,000. Should the contract be reformed? Why or why not? Fully explain your answer. 2. The Laths were the owners of a farm that they wished to sell. Mrs. Mitchell considered purchasing the land but found that a barn located across the road was objectionable. Mitchell argued that the Laths orally agreed to remove the barn in consideration of her promise to purchase the property, which she agreed to do for $8,400 in a written contract. The contract made no mention of the removal of the barn. After Mitchell moved into her new home and made several improvements to the land, the Laths never removed the barn and expressly communicated that they had no intentions of removing the barn. Mitchell sued the Laths for breach of contract. In whose favor do you think the court ruled? What effect does the parol evidence rule have on admissibility of oral agreements regarding the promise to remove the barn? Fully explain your answer. 3. Shirley and Vince Ladner leased 10 acres of their land to J.D. Pigg, who used the land for his cattle farm. The Landers and Pigg created a 10-year contract, providing that rent be paid annually on August 1. Pigg excuted the lease with his first payment of cash in August 2000. On August 1, 2001, Mrs. Pigg attempted to mail the check for the second rent payment but placed the wrong mailing address on the envelope. Consequently, the check was returned to her residence. Mrs. Pigg then properly forwarded the check to the Ladners. However, the Ladners did not receive the check until August 8, 2001, at which time they refused to accept the payment and returned the check to Pigg. The Ladners claimed that the lease had been terminated by Piggâs failure to submit payment in a timely manner, and this failure constituted a material breach of contract. Is Piggâs failure to tender payment on August 1 a material breach of the lease? Why or why not. Fully explain your answer.

rubygoose336

ADMS 2610 Lecture 8: Chapter 13

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Condition Subsequent, Force Majeure, Equitable Remedy

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Legal Tender, Condition Subsequent, Condition Precedent

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 13: Legal Tender, Condition Subsequent, Condition Precedent

Related Questions