benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU / 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?

choices

  1. No, because a condition to the homeowner's obligation to pay was not satisfied.
  2. No, because the contractor breached his duty of good faith and fair dealing by supplying unsatisfactory materials.
  3. Yes, because the homeowner breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing by rejecting the cabinets without justification.
  4. Yes, because the homeowner was the first party to breach the contract.

subject

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

task_id
7c1ae21b-4db5-574c-9faf-2f82199f6f4f
task_key
all--test--7c1ae21b-4db5-574c-9faf-2f82199f6f4f
task_revision_id
1
config / split
all / test

Official source

initial import