Download Written Agreement - Contracts - Exam and more Exams Contract Law in PDF only on Docsity! 1 EXAM NUMBER SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW FINAL EXAMINATION Professor Frost Closed Book Exam May 7, 1992 3 hours CONTRACTS READ ALL THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY Instructions (i) Write your examination number on your bluebook(s) and on this examination. Use only your examination number, not your name. (ii) This is an closed book examination. You MAY NOT use any materials. (iii) Statutory, case and restatement citations may be used but are not required. The better answers will include a thorough analysis of the issues presented rather than a string of citations. (iv) Conciseness and clarity of expression, organization and clarity of presentation, while not separately taken into account in the grade, necessarily have some impact on the grader's evaluation of your understanding of the subject matter. (v) This examination has 6 numbered pages. Check that you have a complete examination. (vi) This examination consists of 3 questions. Each question is assigned a suggested time limit which corresponds to the weight given that question in the determination of the final grade. ALL ANSWERS MUST BE EXPLAINED. Your grade will be based on your analysis of the issues rather than your ability to come to a single "correct" solution. (vii) Remember that this is an examination of your understanding of the material covered in Contracts. Answer the questions based upon the Contracts readings and class discussions and not on the basis of material discussed or read in your other classes. 3 Question 1 One hour and 15 minutes On December 31, 1990, Computer Manufacturing, Inc. ("Manufacturing") and Software Development Corporation ("Development") entered into an written agreement under which Development agreed to write a computer word-processing program for use on Manufacturing's Computers. Manufacturing agreed to pay $1,000,000 for the program and $10 for each computer Manufacturing sold with the software installed. The agreement contained the following provisions: 1. Development agreed to deliver a prototype of the software by December 31, 1991 and agreed to deliver the final version by March 31, 1992; 2. The agreement contained numerous technical specifications and required that the software conform exactly to all such specifications; 3. The prototype was subject to the satisfaction and approval of Manufacturer who was "to be the sole judge of the quality and marketability of the software"; 4. The agreement further provided that "the failure of Development to comply exactly with each and every term and condition of this agreement shall terminate this agreement and shall release Manufacturer from any obligation to perform hereunder", and that "time is of the essence of this agreement." Despite its best efforts at completing the prototype by the date required, Development could not deliver the prototype until January 5, 1992. On January 6, 1992, concerned about the effect the late delivery would have on the agreement, Harry Hacker, the CEO of Development, called Mary Marketing, the Manufacturing official responsible for the project. Mary told Harry, "Don't worry. We deliberately set our deadlines early because we know that there may be unanticipated problems in these projects."
