SOLVED

76) Which of the following statements is true about the legality of contracts? A) To be enforceable, contracts must have legal subject matter, they must be able to be performed legally, or they cannot violate either state or federal law. B) To be enforceable, contracts must have legal subject matter or they must be able to be performed legally. C) Agreements against generally accepted public policy are usually illegal, but are enforceable as long as they do not violate either a state or federal statute. D) To be illegal, a contract must violate either a state or federal statute. E) To be enforceable, contracts must have legal subject matter, they must be able to be performed legally, and they cannot violate either state or federal law. 77) According to Exhibit 16-4 regarding contracts that violate state or federal statutes, which of the following types of contracts would violate a statute in all states? A) An agreement to publish a defamatory article about one’s boss. B) An agreement for an unlicensed attorney to perform legal work. C) An agreement regarding gambling. D) An agreement regarding a usurious loan. E) An employment contract that requires employees to work on the Sabbath. [Poker dealer] Roland and Parna sign a contract for Parna to work as a poker dealer for a minimum of one year in Roland’s casino. The contract includes a requirement for Roland to pay for a training program for Parna for the software system used throughout the casino. Parna completes the program and obtains a certificate. The week before Parna begins work at Roland’s casino, their state passes a law that all poker dealers must be 21 years old. Parna, however, is only nineteen. 78) Is Roland required to employ Parna? A) Yes, because the contract was ratified when Parna completed the training program. B) Although the contract was legal when formed, its subject later became illegal under a new statute, thus it is voidable by either party. C) Although the contract was legal when formed, its subject later became illegal under a new statute, thus both parties are discharged from their obligations under the contract. D) Yes, because the contract was legal when formed. E) No, because the subject matter of the contract is illegal, thus it is void. 79) Is Roland required to pay for the training program? A) No, although the training program was legal, the contract contains an illegal subject and is void. B) Although the contract was legal when formed, its subject later became illegal under a new statute, thus both parties are discharged from their obligations under the contract. C) Although the contract was legal when formed, its subject later became illegal under a new statute, thus it is voidable by either party. D) Yes, the training program was legal and the legal part of the contract can be severed from the illegal part. E) Yes, only Parna has the right to void the contract. 80) Roland wants to avoid paying for the training program and claims the contract is indivisible and thus unenforceable. Is he correct? A) Yes, if Roland could show that the main purpose of the contract was for Parna to work as a poker dealer, then declaring parts of the contract as void would substantially alter the contract. B) No, because courts are likely to enforce a contract regardless of whether severing the contract would substantially alter it. C) No, because almost every contract is divisible. D) No, because even if the legal parts were separated from the contract, the main purpose of the contract (employing Parna as a poker dealer) can be met after she turns 21. E) Yes, because Parna would be unjustifiably enriched if Roland paid for the program. Â Â