Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
Two years later, in a signed writing, the father directed his daughter to pay to a neighbor, at the father's death, $50,000 of the $300,000 that was to go to the nephew. The daughter, who had long disliked the neighbor, told her father that she did not plan to honor his request. The father died, and his daughter has since refused to pay anything to either the nephew or the neighbor. The neighbor has sued the daughter for the $50,000.
A father whose only living relatives were a daughter and a nephew owned land worth $500,000. In return for his daughter's promise to pay $300,000 to his nephew at the time of the father's death, the father executed and delivered to his daughter a quitclaim deed to the land. The daughter took possession of the land.
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
B is incorrect. Even though the nephew was a third-party beneficiary of the contract between the father and his daughter, the nephew's consent was not required for modification unless the contract provided otherwise or his rights had vested. Here, there is no indication in the facts that the contract required the nephew's consent nor that his rights had vested. Moreover, there was no modification of the contract because the daughter did not agree to it.
C is incorrect. The father retained no interest in the future proceeds of his daughter's promise. Thus, the father could not alter the daughter's obligation without her consent.
D is incorrect. There was not an effective modification because the daughter did not agree to it. Furthermore, the general common law rule is that a modification requires consideration, and the father did not provide any consideration.