benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1228 / A homeowner contracted in writing with a kitchen contractor to renovate her…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

A homeowner contracted in writing with a kitchen contractor to renovate her kitchen for $25,000, "subject to the homeowner's complete personal satisfaction." The contractor replaced the cabinets, flooring, and countertops and then sought payment from the homeowner. The homeowner paid the contractor only $20,000, truthfully saying that she did not like the finish on the cabinets and was therefore not satisfied. If the contractor sues the homeowner for the balance of the contract price, will the contractor be likely to prevail?
Plain-text mathematical notation (without MathML)
A homeowner contracted in writing with a kitchen contractor to renovate her kitchen for $25,000, "subject to the homeowner's complete personal satisfaction." The contractor replaced the cabinets, flooring, and countertops and then sought payment from the homeowner. The homeowner paid the contractor only $20,000, truthfully saying that she did not like the finish on the cabinets and was therefore not satisfied. If the contractor sues the homeowner for the balance of the contract price, will the contractor be likely to prevail?
Original LaTeX notation
A homeowner contracted in writing with a kitchen contractor to renovate her kitchen for $25,000, "subject to the homeowner's complete personal satisfaction." The contractor replaced the cabinets, flooring, and countertops and then sought payment from the homeowner. The homeowner paid the contractor only $20,000, truthfully saying that she did not like the finish on the cabinets and was therefore not satisfied. If the contractor sues the homeowner for the balance of the contract price, will the contractor be likely to prevail?

category

law

options

  1. Yes, because the homeowner cannot base the payment on personal satisfaction.
  2. Yes, because the homeowner breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing by rejecting the cabinets without justification.
  3. No, because the contractor breached his duty of good faith and fair dealing by supplying unsatisfactory materials.
  4. No, because the contractor should have ensured the homeowner's satisfaction before seeking payment.
  5. Yes, because the contractor has the right to sue for the balance of the contract price.
  6. Yes, because the homeowner was the first party to breach the contract.
  7. No, because a condition to the homeowner's obligation to pay was not satisfied.
  8. No, because the homeowner was not satisfied with the finish on the cabinets.
  9. Yes, because the contractor fulfilled his part of the contract by completing the renovation.
  10. No, because the homeowner has a right to withhold payment if not completely satisfied.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

upstream_id / Original problem ID
1228
task_id
6d1f63a5-fd70-52ea-84ef-20fd0216e685
task_key
default--test--1228
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import