Chapter hw – law

P may recover, as this Is a breach of the contract. P, in agreeing to accept the pension, forfeited his rights to take another Job In the Industry. This is a legal detriment to P, the promise one which did not exist prior to the formation of the contract. B- This is not enforceable. This is an example of past consideration, which is not consideration. P had already rendered the process at the time the companys promise was made. In other words, the service was not induced by or given in transposition of the promise.If the promise were in writing and acknowledged the past inconsideration, however, this contract would be enforceable. 3) This Is an example of fee on liquidated debt. Because D assumed a raw(a) legal detriment that is, he would not only pay the originally-agreed upon $50,000, notwithstanding also pay 9% interest on top of that summation C is legally bound on his promise. 4) No, the debt is not discharged, as this is a matured liquidated debt and is only satisfie d when the debtor completes his/her entire obligation upright payment.In addition, as NY GOLD 5-1103 states, a signature endorsing a check Is not legally sufficient for accepting a lesser summation to pay an existing debt. In other words, in that location must be sequent documentation with the promise signature, indicating the sufferance of a lesser amount to encounter the debt. 5) S may not recover here, as there exists treaty and contentment in a disputed form of liquidated debt. In this occurrence instance, lot and satisfaction occurs when B sends a check for a emcee disputed amount, based on the expert opinion that the refrigerators were damaged upon shipment.The acceptance and cashing of the check by S discharged the remaining debt by cashing the check. If S had indicated, chthonic protest or without prejudice when endorsing the check, he would fo at a lower place pr thus farted accord and satisfaction from occurring, per New Works interpretation of USC 1-207. 6) s may not recover. Because s sign-language(a) a note, walling the additional SSL ,oho that was owed in the contract, he released B from his exigency to pay the full amount of the order. This satisfies the requirement put into effect by NY GOLD 5-1103. ) a- Barry Is entitled to the dilation $350, as Ann, the promise, did not observe a legal detriment by paying a lesser amount and Barry, the promise, did not obtain a legal benefit. Ann was under a preexist legal duty to pay the full amount of the debt, which is liquidated and undisputed. B- If Barry had provided Ann a signed receipt, then, yes, under NY GOLD 5-1103, the remaining debt would be considered discharged, even though there exists no consideration for the promise. ) This Is a case of unlimited debt, In which the payment amount Is In question accept a lesser amount, $7,000 ($6,000, improver the $1,000 on the promissory note), to settle the claim serves as valid consideration. If Barbara had indicated, under protest or w ithout prejudice when endorsing the check, he would have prevented cord and satisfaction from occurring, per New Works interpretation of USC 1-207. 10) a- C will recover nothing here.By re-negotiating the payment terms, there is a new set of consideration at play, as D obtains a new legal detriment of needing to give his postage collection, along with the new (stated) dollar amount something which D did not have to include with his payment beforehand. B- C will recover the full $1,000 in this case, as the original $10,000 debt amount is liquidated and past due. Additionally, D did not prevail a new legal detriment in paying a lesser amount, nor did C gain a new legal benefit. If C agreed in a signed writing to discharge the debt, then, yes, under NY GOLD 5-1103, the debt would be considered paid off. 12) a- C is only entitled to the $50,000 sum. The promise, O, does not obtain a new legal benefit, and the promise does not incur a new legal detriment. In fact, C was bound by a pre -existing duty to complete the Job for a heart and soul of $50,000, which he received. B- According to NY GOLD 5-1103, this would be considered a written pledge (substituted contract), which is valid. As a result, C would be entitled to the full $55,000 amount, even though there does not exist any new consideration.