Question

A large computer store changed its logo. The computer store orally contracted with a printing company to create new business cards, stationery, laptop bags, and other items with the new logo, at a cost of $10,000. After the printing company had accepted the payment, but before beginning any preparation or work on the job, the computer store called the printing company and said that it was cancelling the contract.
If the printing company sues the computer store, is a court likely to enforce the oral contract despite the Statute of Frauds?
i. Yes, because the contract was for the sale of specially manufactured goods.
ii. Yes, because the printing company had accepted payment.
iii. No, because the printing company had not yet made a substantial beginning in manufacturing the goods.
iv. No, because the computer store had not yet received any goods.

Answer 1

Answer:

B or ii. would be correct

Hope this helps :)