benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace
MMLU-Pro / 1346 / A law school advertised in various law journals for a legal ethics and…
Problem
Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.
question
A law school advertised in various law journals for a legal ethics and jurisprudence professor. Although a number of lawyers applied for the position, one of the applicants submitted a particularly impressive resume. The dean of faculty for the law school immediately wrote to the applicant to offer him the position. In the letter, the dean offered to employ the applicant for the upcoming academic year, which started on August 15, at a salary of
$75,000. The letter also listed the employment terms and conditions, one of which stated that professors are entitled to five paid sick days during the year. The dean included a detailed employment contract containing all these terms, for the applicant's signature. After the applicant received this letter, he replied by mail, requesting a salary of $85,000 and sick leave of 10 days. Upon receipt of the applicant's letter, the dean telephoned the applicant and told him that the law school followed the American Bar Association guidelines with respect to salary and sick leave for its professors. The applicant acquiesced on the salary question, but insisted that his sick leave be extended to 10 days. The dean replied, "Let's not permit a minor issue to stand in the way of your coming to teach at our law school. In the event you require more than 5 sick days, I promise that the matter will be taken care of to your benefit. " The applicant informed the dean that he would sign the contract and forward it to the dean, which he promptly did. The applicant began teaching at the law school on August 15. Three months later, the applicant was out sick for five days with laryngitis. The applicant did not miss another school day until Monday, March 8, when he fell ill with food poisoning. This illness kept him home for five additional sick days. The applicant returned to work on March 15. When the applicant received his salary check at the end of the week, his check did not include payment for the previous week (from March 8 to March 12). Accompanying the check was a statement that read:"Salary payment for period from Monday, March 1 through Friday, March 19 with pro rata deduction to reflect five teaching days missed during said period. "When the applicant received his check, he immediately confronted the dean and requested full payment for the week of March 8 through 12. The dean responded, "I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. "The applicant asserted a claim against the law school for breach of contract. The applicant offers to introduce evidence that during his telephone conversation with dean of faculty, the dean promised, if necessary, to provide him with additional sick days. The most accurate statement concerning the dean's oral promise would be thatPlain-text mathematical notation (without MathML)
A law school advertised in various law journals for a legal ethics and jurisprudence professor. Although a number of lawyers applied for the position, one of the applicants submitted a particularly impressive resume. The dean of faculty for the law school immediately wrote to the applicant to offer him the position. In the letter, the dean offered to employ the applicant for the upcoming academic year, which started on August 15, at a salary of $75,000. The letter also listed the employment terms and conditions, one of which stated that professors are entitled to five paid sick days during the year. The dean included a detailed employment contract containing all these terms, for the applicant's signature. After the applicant received this letter, he replied by mail, requesting a salary of $85,000 and sick leave of 10 days. Upon receipt of the applicant's letter, the dean telephoned the applicant and told him that the law school followed the American Bar Association guidelines with respect to salary and sick leave for its professors. The applicant acquiesced on the salary question, but insisted that his sick leave be extended to 10 days. The dean replied, "Let's not permit a minor issue to stand in the way of your coming to teach at our law school. In the event you require more than 5 sick days, I promise that the matter will be taken care of to your benefit. " The applicant informed the dean that he would sign the contract and forward it to the dean, which he promptly did. The applicant began teaching at the law school on August 15. Three months later, the applicant was out sick for five days with laryngitis. The applicant did not miss another school day until Monday, March 8, when he fell ill with food poisoning. This illness kept him home for five additional sick days. The applicant returned to work on March 15. When the applicant received his salary check at the end of the week, his check did not include payment for the previous week (from March 8 to March 12). Accompanying the check was a statement that read:"Salary payment for period from Monday, March 1 through Friday, March 19 with pro rata deduction to reflect five teaching days missed during said period. "When the applicant received his check, he immediately confronted the dean and requested full payment for the week of March 8 through 12. The dean responded, "I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. "The applicant asserted a claim against the law school for breach of contract. The applicant offers to introduce evidence that during his telephone conversation with dean of faculty, the dean promised, if necessary, to provide him with additional sick days. The most accurate statement concerning the dean's oral promise would be that
Original LaTeX notation
A law school advertised in various law journals for a legal ethics and jurisprudence professor. Although a number of lawyers applied for the position, one of the applicants submitted a particularly impressive resume. The dean of faculty for the law school immediately wrote to the applicant to offer him the position. In the letter, the dean offered to employ the applicant for the upcoming academic year, which started on August 15, at a salary of $75,000. The letter also listed the employment terms and conditions, one of which stated that professors are entitled to five paid sick days during the year. The dean included a detailed employment contract containing all these terms, for the applicant's signature. After the applicant received this letter, he replied by mail, requesting a salary of $85,000 and sick leave of 10 days. Upon receipt of the applicant's letter, the dean telephoned the applicant and told him that the law school followed the American Bar Association guidelines with respect to salary and sick leave for its professors. The applicant acquiesced on the salary question, but insisted that his sick leave be extended to 10 days. The dean replied, "Let's not permit a minor issue to stand in the way of your coming to teach at our law school. In the event you require more than 5 sick days, I promise that the matter will be taken care of to your benefit. " The applicant informed the dean that he would sign the contract and forward it to the dean, which he promptly did. The applicant began teaching at the law school on August 15. Three months later, the applicant was out sick for five days with laryngitis. The applicant did not miss another school day until Monday, March 8, when he fell ill with food poisoning. This illness kept him home for five additional sick days. The applicant returned to work on March 15. When the applicant received his salary check at the end of the week, his check did not include payment for the previous week (from March 8 to March 12). Accompanying the check was a statement that read:"Salary payment for period from Monday, March 1 through Friday, March 19 with pro rata deduction to reflect five teaching days missed during said period. "When the applicant received his check, he immediately confronted the dean and requested full payment for the week of March 8 through 12. The dean responded, "I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. "The applicant asserted a claim against the law school for breach of contract. The applicant offers to introduce evidence that during his telephone conversation with dean of faculty, the dean promised, if necessary, to provide him with additional sick days. The most accurate statement concerning the dean's oral promise would be that
category
law
options
- parol evidence is admissible to show that the parties assented to their written contract only as a partial integration of their complete contract.
- parol evidence is admissible to prove the written contract was a mistake.
- parol evidence is admissible to show the dean's personal guarantee of additional sick days.
- parol evidence is admissible to show that the written contract was void due to lack of consideration.
- parol evidence is inadmissible to prove any oral agreements made prior to the signing of the written contract.
- parol evidence is admissible to show that the applicant misunderstood the terms of the contract.
- parol evidence is admissible to prove the dean coerced the applicant into signing the contract.
- parol evidence is admissible to show that the written contract is not enforceable, because of undue influence or fraud.
- parol evidence is inadmissible to prove contemporaneous oral agreements that vary or contradict the terms of a written contract.
src
ori_mmlu-professional_law
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
initial import