16) In the Case Opener, Apple customers tried to disaffirm purchases of game currency by their children. What was the result? A) The court dismissed the lawsuit on the basis that no contractual agreement was needed in order for the parents to be bound in regard to purchases of game currency so long as their passwords were used. B) The court dismissed the lawsuit on the basis that the parents were bound by the Terms of Service and notifications of their original contracts with Apple binding them to future purchases of game currency regardless of whether passwords were used. C) The court refused to dismiss the lawsuit because as a matter of law parents cannot be required to contractually agree to their children’s future purchases that are unapproved by the parents. D) The court dismissed the lawsuit on the basis that the parents were bound by the Terms of Service and notifications of their original contracts with Apple binding them to future purchases of game currency when their passwords were used. E) The court refused to dismiss the lawsuit because no case law was provided to prove that Apple’s Terms of Service served as a contract for all subsequent transactions. 17) In King v. Riedl, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendant did not have the right to proceed against them for sums allegedly owed, because the contractor was not licensed as a residential home builder (as required by state law). What was the result on appeal? A) The court ruled that the defendant could maintain an action against the plaintiffs and prevail because the proof showed that he was eligible for the required license although he had not yet obtained it. B) Although recognizing that the contractor’s failure to be properly licensed would not in and of itself bar recovery, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs because the facts at trial showed that the contractor performed inadequate work. C) The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on the basis that the contractor was statutorily barred from bringing an action to enforce payment because he lacked a residential home builder license and the amount of the contract satisfied statutory requirements. D) The court ruled that because the contractor lacked the required state license and the amount of the contract satisfied statutory requirements, under common law he could only recover for expenses for materials and labor costs, not the full contract price. E) The court ruled that the defendant could maintain an action against the plaintiffs and prevail because the state statute only applied when the cost of a contractual undertaking exceeded $10,000, and because the contractor billed periodically, the plaintiffs were never presented with a bill exceeding $10,000. 18) Which of the following was the result on appeal in Eric Lucier and Karen Haley v. Angela and James Williams, Cambridge Associates Ltd., and Al Vasys, the case in the text in which, after finding significant problems with their roof, the plaintiffs claimed that provisions in a home inspection contract illegally limited the liability of the defendants? A) The court ruled in favor of the defendants on the basis that no contract of adhesion was involved and that, therefore, by definition the contract satisfied public policy. B) The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on the basis that the limitation of liability provision in the contract was unconscionable and violated the public policy of the state. C) The court ruled in favor of the defendants on the basis that while the court would intervene in appropriate cases, a presumption against a finding of unconscionability exists in home inspection contracts; and the plaintiffs failed to rebut that presumption. D) The court ruled in favor of the defendants on the basis that the plaintiffs freely entered into the contract and should, therefore, be bound to its terms. E) The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on the basis that although the contract was not unconscionable, public policy was violated. 19) In Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc., v. Cardegna et al, the case was heard in front of the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether the court or the arbitrator should decide the issues of a case when illegality in relation to a contract is claimed. What was the ruling? A) The court should address charges of illegality involving either an arbitration provision or a contract as a whole. B) An arbitrator should address charges of illegality involving either an arbitration provision or a contract as a whole. C) When an arbitration provision in a contract is not specifically challenged, a court should address a charge of illegality to a contract as a whole.an arbitration provision in a contract is not specifically challenged, an arbitrator should address a charge of illegality to a contract as a whole. D) When an arbitration provision in a contract is not specifically challenged, an arbitrator should address a charge of illegality to a contract as a whole. E) Whether a court or an arbitrator should address charges of illegality involving either an arbitration provision or a contract as a whole depends upon the first to file rule. 20) Which of the following is an element of a legally binding contract? A) Inquiry B) Knowledge C) Acknowledgement D) Affirmance E) Capacity  Â