Question

1. joseph tells mary that joseph is a licensed real estate broker. mary hires him as broker to sell her home in exchange for a commission, and the home sells. mary learns joseph lied, and is not actually a licensed real estate broker. the contract: a. has offer acceptance and consideration, thus must be enforced against mary b. is illegal due to josephs lack of a brokers license, and thus mary can refuse to pay c. is illegal due to josephs lack of a brokers license, but mary must pay d. is a bilateral mistake, and thus mary can refuse to pay 2) a covenant not to compete not allowing a law firm receptionist to work at another law firm: a. is likely enforceable, because it is reasonable b. is likely enforceable, because all covenants not to compete are enforceable c. is likely unenforceable, because all covenants not to compete are unenforceable d. is likely unenforceable, because it is not reasonably tied to interests of the firm 3) a law firm contracts with a consultant to render services during september 1 - 5, 2025 and then again during dates in 2026. this contract, to be enforceable: a. must be in writing, because otherwise it would be hard to prove its terms b. does not have to be in writing, if it will be completed before september 1, 2026 c. must be in writing, because that is the rule for all contracts d. does not have to be in writing, so long as there has been partial performance 4) ben and joan enter into a written contract with clear terms. the contract does not provide for ben to get a 10% advance on payment. ben requests a 10% advance, based on an alleged oral discussion he previously had with jen. generally at common law: a. ben is not entitled to the 10% advance, per the contracts clear written terms b. the court needs to analyze the oral discussion, to determine if the advance was discussed c. the parties must meet and rewrite the contract to see if they forgot any terms d. advances are barred by the preexisting duty rule bonus: 5) the doctrine that some contracts must be in writing to be enforceable is called the: statute of frauds

Explanation:

1. In contract law, if a party lacks a required license (like a real - estate broker's license), the contract is illegal. Mary can refuse to pay as the contract's foundation (Joseph's licensure) is false.
2. Covenants not to compete must be reasonable and tied to the employer's legitimate interests. A law - firm receptionist's work is not likely to involve trade secrets or client relationships that would justify a non - compete. So, it is unenforceable as it is not reasonably tied to the firm's interests.
3. Contracts that cannot be performed within one year of the contract's making must be in writing. Here, the contract has services in 2025 and 2026. If it is completed before September 1, 2026 (within one year of the start of the contract period), it does not need to be in writing.
4. At common law, the parol evidence rule states that if a written contract has clear terms, prior oral agreements that contradict or add to the written terms are not admissible. So Ben is not entitled to the 10% advance as per the written contract.
5. The Statute of Frauds is the doctrine that requires certain contracts (like those that cannot be performed within one year, contracts for the sale of land, etc.) to be in writing to be enforceable.

Answer:

1. B. Is illegal due to Joseph’s lack of a broker’s license, and thus Mary can refuse to pay
2. D. Is likely unenforceable, because it is not reasonably tied to interests of the firm
3. B. Does not have to be in writing, if it will be completed before September 1, 2026
4. A. Ben is not entitled to the 10% advance, per the contract’s clear written terms
5. Statute of Frauds