CONTRACT OR NAH?
AWW, HOW CONSIDERATE?
WHATS YOUR CONDITION?
YOU LITTLE BREACH
NOW THATS IMPOSSIBLE!
100

What are the 3 elements required for a valid contract?

Mutual assent (offer & acceptance) + Consideration
100

Past consideration is valid or invalid?

Is a promise to make a gift enforceable?

Invalid

No — no consideration.

100

What’s the effect of the non-occurrence of an express condition?

The duty is strictly excused; no substantial performance allowed.

100

When does uncertainty rise to the level of anticipatory repudiation?

Only when the statement is clear, unequivocal, and definite that performance won’t occur.

100

A performer becomes permanently incapacitated before the concert date. What doctrine applies?

Impossibility (personal services).

200

A homeowner emails a contractor: “I’m thinking of having my kitchen redone. What would you charge?” Contractor replies with a detailed price. Has an offer been made?  

No. 

Initial inquiry isn’t an offer, contractor’s quote is an invitation to negotiate. 

200

Employee threatens to quit unless employer raises salary mid-contract. Enforceable modification?

No. Pre-existing duty rule; coercion makes it invalid.

200

When will a court excuse a failed condition to avoid disproportionate forfeiture?

When the condition isn’t material to the exchange and the forfeiture would be extreme.

200

What must the non-breaching party do to “reinstate” a repudiating party who retracts?

Repudiation can be retracted unless the non-breaching party (1) materially relied or (2) treated it as final.

200

A risk that was foreseeable at contracting occurs. Does impracticability apply?

No. Must be unforeseeable or outside assumed risk.

300

A landlord mails an offer to renew a lease. Tenant mails acceptance, but landlord dies before receiving it. Is there a contract?

Yes. 

Acceptance effective on dispatch; death after dispatch doesn’t terminate.

300

Past consideration is valid or invalid?

Yes, via promissory estoppel despite gift-promise origins.

300

Contractor substantially performs but misses a minor specification. Can owner claim breach of a condition precedent?

No. Courts treat unclear conditions as constructive, not express.

300

What if a party has “reasonable grounds for insecurity”?

They may demand adequate assurances; failure to provide = repudiation.

300

A buyer rents a balcony for a parade, but the parade is cancelled unexpectedly. Doctrine?

Frustration of purpose

400

A person says, “I’ll sell you my car for $10,000 acceptance must be by text.” The offeree emails “I accept.” Contract?

No. Offeror is master of the offer; improper method = counteroffer.

400

A subcontractor gives a mistaken bid. GC relies and wins the contract. Sub refuses to perform. Enforceable?

Yes, under promissory estoppel

400

A party tells the other “Don’t worry about delivering the certificate, we’re good.” Later they sue for failure of that condition. What doctrines apply?

Waiver (intentional relinquishment) and estoppel (if relied upon)

400

Standard for constructive conditions of exchange?  

A party must substantially perform before receiving the (counter) performance.

400

Impracticability requires what beyond mere hardship?

Extreme difficulty or expense not foreseeable at formation.

500

A builder begins performance after receiving a unilateral-offer promise (reward-style). When does the offer become irrevocable?

Once the offeree begins performance, Restatement 45 creates an option contract.

500

A debt is barred by the statute of limitations. Debtor later promises in writing to repay. Enforceable?

Yes. A new written promise to pay a time-barred debt is enforceable without new consideration.

500

When is a waived condition revivable?

When notice is given + condition hasn’t materially relied upon + revival is permitted under fairness principles.

500

Contractor finishes 95% of a project. Owner refuses to pay any portion, claiming material breach. What’s the rule?

Substantial performance → owner must pay K price minus cost to cure.

500

A force majeure clause lists some events but not the one that occurred. How does the court decide?

Interpret clause narrowly; only listed or similar events excuse.

M
e
n
u