benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1748 / A ceramics studio contracted with an artist to produce cups and saucers designed…

Problem

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

question

A ceramics studio contracted with an artist to produce cups and saucers designed by the artist. The artist was an established designer of collectible ceramic dinnerware, and the studio did production work for many artists who created ceramic dinnerware. The price and quantity term of the contract read: "2,000 sets of the cups and saucers at $5 each, payable on delivery." The contract contained a merger clause. The studio produced the cups and saucers and delivered them along with a bill for $20,000 (4,000 pieces at 5perpiece).Theartistrefusedtopaymorethan5 per piece). The artist refused to pay more than 10,000 (2,000 sets at $5 per set). At the trial of the studio's action against the artist for breach of contract, the studio introduced evidence of an established practice in the studio industry to price cup-and-saucer sets on a per-piece, not a per-set, basis. Is the studio's evidence admissible?
Plain-text mathematical notation (without MathML)
A ceramics studio contracted with an artist to produce cups and saucers designed by the artist. The artist was an established designer of collectible ceramic dinnerware, and the studio did production work for many artists who created ceramic dinnerware. The price and quantity term of the contract read: "2,000 sets of the cups and saucers at $5 each, payable on delivery." The contract contained a merger clause. The studio produced the cups and saucers and delivered them along with a bill for $20,000 (4,000 pieces at 5perpiece).Theartistrefusedtopaymorethan10,000 (2,000 sets at $5 per set). At the trial of the studio's action against the artist for breach of contract, the studio introduced evidence of an established practice in the studio industry to price cup-and-saucer sets on a per-piece, not a per-set, basis. Is the studio's evidence admissible?
Original LaTeX notation
A ceramics studio contracted with an artist to produce cups and saucers designed by the artist. The artist was an established designer of collectible ceramic dinnerware, and the studio did production work for many artists who created ceramic dinnerware. The price and quantity term of the contract read: "2,000 sets of the cups and saucers at $5 each, payable on delivery." The contract contained a merger clause. The studio produced the cups and saucers and delivered them along with a bill for $20,000 (4,000 pieces at $5 per piece). The artist refused to pay more than $10,000 (2,000 sets at $5 per set). At the trial of the studio's action against the artist for breach of contract, the studio introduced evidence of an established practice in the studio industry to price cup-and-saucer sets on a per-piece, not a per-set, basis. Is the studio's evidence admissible?

category

law

options

  1. No, because such evidence would vary an unambiguous term of the contract.
  2. No, because the evidence would contradict the explicit terms of the contract.
  3. Yes, because evidence of trade usage is always admissible.
  4. Yes, because the usage of trade is offered to give meaning to the contract.
  5. No, because the contract contained a merger clause which makes extrinsic evidence inadmissible.
  6. Yes, because the studio's interpretation of the contract aligns with the industry practice.
  7. Yes, because the court should consider industry norms in interpreting the contract.
  8. No, because the agreement was completely integrated.
  9. No, because the artist was unaware of the industry practice.
  10. Yes, because the evidence of established industry practice may explain the ambiguity in the contract.

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
1748
task_id
a12e2823-1a20-5145-94da-772ae022fb07
task_key
default--test--1748
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import