See the attached file.
With regard to the attached scenario, I have some questions
to help with a project I am doing.
1) Did the parties have an enforceable contract? If yes, how
so and if no, under what exceptions?
2) Does the oral agreement between the parties fall within
any exception to the Statute of Frauds? How so?
3) How would the lawsuit be affected if Novell admitted that
the parties had an oral contract under which Meade was entitled to 25% of the
difference between accounts receivable and payable as of the day Meade quit?
4) With regard to any of the above questions, are there
similar cases known that support these explanations?
Solution Preview
1) Did the parties have an enforceable contract? If yes, how
so and if no, under what exceptions?
Yes, verbal contracts are enforceable when two parties agree
on terms of a contract. The exceptions in this case aren't known because the
contract did not specify the amount of the share(s) that Meade would be
entitled to or the paradigm of how these funds would be dispersed. If this were
in writing, the disagreement over the amount of money that she was entitled to
wouldn't exist.
2) Does the oral agreement between the parties fall within
any exception to the Statute of ...
Email us at acemyassignments@gmail.com for full answers
