Formalism Over Content
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
20523_easter_stage_guaranty · CONTRACTS · Choice ANo, because a guaranty memorandum must always be signed by both Peter and Ruth.
Why it's attractive
It feels safer because a guaranty involves both the debtor and the guarantor. The breaker is that the suit charges Ruth, so Peter’s signature is an added formality.
Why it's wrong
The choice adds an always-both-sign requirement. The Gold Key cuts the extra signature condition.
Spot it next time
Ask whose promise the supplier is enforcing.
20523_easter_stage_guaranty · CONTRACTS · Choice CNo, because a suretyship memorandum must be sent or addressed to the creditor seeking to enforce it.
Why it's attractive
It mirrors Ruth’s stated objection that the note went to Lydia instead of the supplier. The breaker is that addressee identity is not the memorandum-sufficiency test.
Why it's wrong
The choice makes addressee identity decisive. The Gold Key cuts the creditor-addressee requirement.
Spot it next time
Apply the Gold Key: signer and content, not addressee.
20523_easter_stage_guaranty · CONTRACTS · Choice DYes, but only if Peter also signed Ruth’s note.
Why it's attractive
It sounds like a careful yes answer because it adds Peter’s signature as a safeguard. The breaker is that Peter is not the party being charged on Ruth’s promise.
Why it's wrong
The choice adds Peter’s signature as a condition. The Gold Key cuts the debtor-signature requirement.
Spot it next time
Peter’s signature is not required to charge Ruth.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →