Would you be able to check my 5 answers:

1. The continued possession by a minor of a good after reaching the age of majority will be treated as an implied ratification of the contract by which the minor acquired that good

Answer True

2. If a contract is held to be avoidable due to a party's intoxication, then his or her power to disaffirm the contract will usually be conditioned on full restitution of the purchased items.

Answer false

3. Joe is an adult who bought a car before reaching the age of majority. Joe could not disaffirm his contractual obligations if he:

a. failed to demand that the contract be canceled within a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority.

b. misrepresented his age at the time of the purchase.

c. is married.

d. none of the above.

Answer...I am torn between a and d. The reason for a sound correct except for the "failed to demand" that part sounds wrong

4. The duty of a minor to pay for the reasonable value of necessary goods he or she purchased arises from the contract itself

Answer: true

5. When a state statute imposes a duty of restitution on a minor who disaffirms a contract, the minor must take steps to put the nonbreaching adult party in the position that he or she occupied prior to the formation of the contract

answer: true

Thanks

Does a minor's duty of restitution supercedes duty to restoration?

1. To check the answer, we need to understand the concept of implied ratification in contract law. Implied ratification occurs when an individual, in this case, a minor, continues to possess and benefit from a good or asset after reaching the age of majority. This action is seen as an acceptance or confirmation of the contract by which the minor acquired the good. In other words, by continuing to possess the good, the minor is treated as if they have ratified the contract.

So, based on this explanation, the answer provided - True - is correct.

2. In this question, we are asked about the conditions for voiding a contract due to a party's intoxication. Restitution refers to the act of returning or compensating for something received. Generally, if a contract is considered voidable due to a party's intoxication, they have the option to disaffirm the contract. Disaffirming the contract means declaring it void and seeking restitution.

However, the answer provided - False - is incorrect. The power to disaffirm the contract is not usually conditioned on full restitution of the purchased items. The party may have to return the items or compensate for their use if they can no longer be returned in the same condition, but full restitution is not a typical requirement.

3. This question is about Joe, who is an adult, buying a car before reaching the age of majority. The options presented are alphanumerical, so let's break them down:

a. Failed to demand that the contract be canceled within a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority.
b. Misrepresented his age at the time of the purchase.
c. Is married.
d. None of the above.

To determine the correct answer, we need to know the legal principles regarding disaffirming contractual obligations for a minor in this specific case. Unfortunately, the information provided is not sufficient to make a definitive determination. However, based on the given circumstances, it is likely that option (a) is correct. Minors usually have a duty to disaffirm contracts within a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority. Therefore, the answer would be (a).

4. The statement in this question is referring to the duty of a minor to pay the reasonable value for necessary goods they have purchased. The key term here is "necessary goods," which typically refers to items that are essential for a minor's well-being, such as food, clothing, and shelter.

In contract law, a minor may disaffirm or void a contract, but they still have an obligation to pay for the reasonable value of necessary goods. This duty arises from the inherent nature of the contract itself. Therefore, the answer provided - True - is correct.

5. The question is asking about the duty of restitution for a minor who disaffirms a contract as imposed by a state statute. Restitution refers to the return or compensation for something received. When a minor disaffirms a contract, they must take steps to return the nonbreaching adult party to the position they were in before the contract was formed. This includes returning any property or compensating for the use or loss of property.

Given this explanation, the answer provided - True - is correct.

Overall, your answers are mostly correct, with the exception of question 3 where it is difficult to confidently determine the correct option based on the given information.