TX Bar Contracts 3

Question 1

Under the Statute of Frauds, which of the following contracts does NOT need to be evidenced by a writing to be enforceable?

Accepted Answer

A contract for the sale of goods priced at $800

Answer

Under UCC § 2-201, the Statute of Frauds applies to contracts for the sale of goods at $500 or more; $800 exceeds that threshold, so a writing is required — the question asks which does NOT need a writing, and none of the others are excluded, making this a trick: all four actually require a writing. Wait — let me re-examine.

Question 2

Both a buyer and seller mutually believed, at the time of contracting, that a painting was an original work worth $50,000. It later turns out the painting is a forgery worth $500. Which defense best applies?

Accepted Answer

Mutual mistake of fact — both parties were wrong about a material fact existing at the time of contracting

Answer

Mutual mistake applies when both parties are mistaken about a material fact that existed at the time of contracting, allowing rescission if the risk was not allocated to one party.

Question 3

A seller used high-pressure sales tactics to convince an elderly, isolated widow to purchase an overpriced product she did not need. She signed while under extreme emotional distress and the seller's domination. Which defense is most applicable?

Accepted Answer

Undue influence

Answer

Undue influence occurs when one party dominates the weakened will of another — typically involving a relationship of trust or a victim whose ability to exercise free judgment is seriously impaired.

Question 4

A contractor threatens to walk off a construction project midway through unless the owner agrees to pay an additional $50,000 beyond the contract price. The owner, facing serious losses if the project stops, agrees. Later, the owner seeks to avoid the modification. Which doctrine best supports the owner?

Accepted Answer

Economic duress (business compulsion)

Answer

Economic duress (business compulsion) allows a party to avoid a contract or modification when the other party made a wrongful threat that left no reasonable alternative but to comply.

Question 5

A contract is challenged on unconscionability grounds. Which TWO elements must typically be proven?

Accepted Answer

Procedural unconscionability (unfair bargaining process) and substantive unconscionability (oppressive terms)

Answer

Unconscionability requires both a procedural element (unfair surprise or unequal bargaining power) and a substantive element (unreasonably oppressive or one-sided terms).

(TX Bar) Texas Bar Exam Practice Test

(TX Bar) Texas Bar Exam Practice Test

TX Bar Contracts 3