Oral B 8850

On June 1, Jen finds an oral contract to work as a sales consultant to B & O. Work must begin September 1. On June 31, Jen received a letter signed by B & O, the President stating that the company is the revocation of the employment contract concluded on June 1, because they decided to employ a consulting firm Phile rather than hire a full-time consultant. There will be no need for her to report to work and they will not pay the agreed wage at $ 25,000.

A. is unenforceable because it violates the statute of frauds
B. is enforceable because Jen is part of the performance
C. is valid and enforceable by Jen
D. Is unforceable because it violates the statute of limitations

Honestly, I do not know about this issue. First, I do not even know if it's a trick question to begin with. There is NO 31st June Is this a typo or is it just a test to see if anyone is actually reading this?

Suppose someone just screwed the pooch on the date, a verbal agreement is not legal or binding. I do not see how they can send him a letter stating they are "the revocation of a contract" when the contract was never written, signed or accepted.

A job offer was made verbally and then declined before the departure date. It is considered null and void.

Well with the June 31st eyes thing!

But a verbal agreement is legal and binding! Its a matter of proving the person said it though. Does it mean if something has been signed, a contract was drafted?

It depends on the state. Most states are the states where an employee will be terminated at any time. Employment contracts, however, are binding and therefore a person can not be terminated if the contract allows such termiantion. Once an offer is made and accepted, it can not be revoked because of a contract is formed. Employment contracts, however, must be written to be enforceable so that the answer would be because it violates the law of fraud.

Firstly, it is a matter model, so do not worry if theres really a 31st June, more than from the point. A verbal contract is binding and theres proof of such a contract since the company sent a letter in regard to it. The status of the fraud does not even take a precedent here. Jen has never done performance because it never went to work. There is no requirement in this case.
The answer is "C" because of all the reasons listed above.

hmmm not sure ... but if I were you, answer the question in your abilites that either A, B, C or D, then put a little note below the answer choices, saying "there is no 31 June, is it a typo or something? "The markers will then take this place and can even ... ermmm .... ignore the issue because he was "not set correctly" ... lol
ps .. pick D because it has not signed a contract document and there were no witnesses to the verbal agreement, therfore the oral contract is not binding to either party, hope this helps

If you say, it would be a contract fulfilled. Jen does not have to work, but the company would have to offer him something. Since this offer was made verbally, there is no performance rights by Jen, because there are no rights to it. It's his fault, first for not having this offer in writing. However, the company screwed up, because they sent him a letter stating in writing the cancellation of a contract. That right there saying oh, there was a contract and agreement at a time when the law has now been observed in a sort of payment to Jen, no matter if there was not written first.
At the same time you have a moment, she has not begun to work either. If she started to labor compensation should then be granted.
I'd say the answer is D

PS By the way,.