An uncle, in writing, promised his nephew 5,000 if his nephew would refrain from drinking, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until the age of twenty-one, all of which was otherwise legal for the nephew to do at the time. Would this agreement need to be in writing to satisfy the statute of frauds and be enforced?
a. Yes, because the consideration is 5,000, which is more than 500
b. Yes, if the nephew will not become twenty-one within a year
c. Yes, because all contracts must be in writing to be enforced
d. No, because there is no valid agreement. However, even if the agreement is not valid, it will be enforced as long as it is in writing and signed by both parties.
Radicals argue that welfare for the rich is distributed
A. through hidden tax loopholes
B. special favors from Congress
C. Investment credits
D. loans and loan guarantees
Gilbert S. Shaw was chairman of the Board of Directors of the National School of Heavy Equipment, Inc He drew a substantial weekly salary, held 100 percent of the voting stock and 51 percent of the Class B stock of the school and employed most of his family in the operation of the school. Shaw contracted on behalf of the school with Stuart Studio to produce 25,000 catalogs for the school. The catalogs were being printed in an effort to attract new students through an advertising campaign, as the school was bordering on financial ruin. Gilbert orally assured Stuart Studio that if the National School could not pay the full total that he would stand good for the entire bill. The school is now unable to pay for the printing, and Gilbert argues that he is not liable because the statute of frauds requires his promise to be in writing. Which rule might consider this promise to be original and permit the oral agreement to be enforced?
a. The parole evidence rule c. The public policy rule
b. The leading object rule d. The Uniform Commercial Code
Quick Reply
