Practice Quiz

Paralegal Exam Prep - Question List

Select how would you like to study

Study Mode Free Daily Question Test Mode
106. Under the Statute of Frauds, which of the following "writings" is sufficient?
  1. A single typed agreement
  2. A single handwritten document
  3. Three separate documents
  4. A typed agreement along with a handwritten note
  5. All of the above.
See answer
107. Which of the following would satisfy the signature requirement of the Statute of Frauds?
  1. Signing the contract with an "X."
  2. Signing the contract illegibly.
  3. Printing the name.
  4. All of the above.
  5. None of the above.
See answer
108. John asks Joe to mow his 2-acre lawn and agreed to pay Joe $50. After Joe completes half the job, John tells him that he changed his mind and he no longer wants Joe to mow his lawn. Will Joe be able collect the $50 that John agreed to pay him?
  1. No, because John revoked the contract.
  2. Yes, because $50 was the agreed upon compensation in the contract.
  3. No. But Joe will be able to collect $25 as restitution for the benefit that John received from the work that Joe completed.
  4. Yes. Joe will be able to collect $50 as restitution for the benefit that John received from the work that Joe completed.
  5. Yes. Joe will be able to collect $25 as restitution for the benefit that John received from the work that Joe completed, plus an additional $25 in punitive damages.
See answer
109. Joe the plumber contracts with Jane the homeowner to install new sewer lines. The agreed upon price was $4,500. Halfway through the job, Joe told Jane that he had to change the price to $6,500. Jane refused to pay the additional $2,000. Joe refused to finish the work unless Jane paid. Jane reluctantly paid. Joe finished the work. Jane sued Joe for return of the $2,000. Who will win?
  1. Jane will win based on the defense of fraud.
  2. Jane will win because the modification of the contract terms was not supported by additional consideration from Joe.
  3. Jane will lose because she agreed to the modification of the contract.
  4. Jane will win based on the defense of physical duress.
  5. Jane will win based on the defense of economic duress.
See answer
110. When is intoxication a defense to the formation of a contract?
  1. Intoxication is never a defense to the formation of a contract.
  2. Intoxication is always a defense to the formation of a contract.
  3. Intoxication is a defense to the formation of a contract if the non-intoxicated party contributed to the intoxication of the other party.
  4. Intoxication is a defense to the formation of a contract if the other party knew that the intoxicated party was impaired and that due to the intoxication was unable to understand the nature of the transaction.
  5. Intoxication is a defense to the formation of a contract if both parties were intoxicated at the time they entered into the contract.
See answer

Select how would you like to study

Study Mode Free Daily Question Test Mode