#T3BE 230 - Early Answer for Patrons
Added 2021-06-07 23:00:03 +0000 UTCThomas not only biffed this one, he had a rare Second Chance Law Firm failure, choosing (C), and picking (B) as a backup, when the correct answer was D.
Thomas is now 120-for-230 (52.2%) and the coin -- exempted from this one -- remains 2-for-5 (40%).
Comments
I guessed wrong, thinking it would be A, but looking at it, really only A or D made any sense and the only reason I didn’t think it was D is that it so often seems that what’s fair and equitable doesn’t matter. I guess dealing with multi-million dollar contracts is one of the rare cases where it does, which is actually pretty unsurprising.
2021-06-08 17:17:12 +0000 UTCI am studying for the actual bar and this one gave me trouble. the issue is that the "fair and equitable" exception to the consideration requirement for modification is not even evenhandedly applied. Sometimes unanticipated economic circumstances aren't considered justification for modification, sometimes it is. My guess is that the increase in steel price was so ridiculous that it became unforeseeable. whereas just a 5% increase wouldn't have affected the deal.
Odin The Law Dog
2021-06-08 11:13:28 +0000 UTC
