Anticipatory Repudiation Timing
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 1 active question. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- Contracts1
Example wrong choices
21029_timothy-barnabas-variant · CONTRACTS · Choice ANo, because the provision requiring Barnabas to supply all the cedar boards Timothy needed in 2021 makes it impossible for the court to determine Barnabas's damages with reasonable certainty.
Why it's attractive
The word 'impossible' is an absolute. UCC §2-306 validates requirements contracts, and a stated minimum quantity makes damages calculable.
Why it's wrong
The word 'impossible' is an absolute. UCC §2-306 validates requirements contracts, and a stated minimum quantity makes damages calculable.
21029_timothy-barnabas-variant · CONTRACTS · Choice BYes, because Timothy might still decide to order 1,500 boards before the end of 2021.
Why it's attractive
Timothy's letter says 'I will not be ordering any cedar boards.' This is unambiguous. The 'might still' reasoning ignores the clear repudiation.
Why it's wrong
Timothy's letter says 'I will not be ordering any cedar boards.' This is unambiguous. The 'might still' reasoning ignores the clear repudiation.
21029_timothy-barnabas-variant · CONTRACTS · Choice DNo, because damages are presumed to result from every breach of contract.
Why it's attractive
'Presumed' is a red-flag word. The injured party always bears the burden of proving damages.
Why it's wrong
'Presumed' is a red-flag word. The injured party always bears the burden of proving damages.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →