Contracts drills should look like the exam: a dated string of communications with money waiting at the end. Two original questions below, one with a full model answer demonstrating the timeline discipline and the damages math, one with a self grading key, plus the sourcing order for more. Doctrine is in the hub, execution in the exam guide, and the take, grade, log protocol in how to use practice exams.

Drill one: the timeline (25 minutes)

March 1: Baker, who runs a commercial bakery, emails Flourish Mills: We will buy 2,000 pounds of your bread flour at 1.10 per pound, delivery April 1. This offer is open until March 10. March 4: Mills replies: We accept.

Note that all disputes are subject to arbitration per our standard terms. March 6: Baker phones Mills: Flour prices are dropping, cancel my order. March 8: Mills, having already milled the order, tenders delivery; Baker refuses.

Market price for equivalent flour on March 8 is 0.90 per pound. Analyze the parties' rights and Mills' remedies.

Model answer

Classification first: a sale of goods between merchants, so Article 2 governs. Taking the communications in order: the March 1 email is an offer, quantity, price, delivery stated, nothing open; the open until March 10 promise is unenforceable as an option absent consideration, though it never matters here. The March 4 reply is an acceptance despite the additional arbitration term: under 2-207 between merchants, a definite expression of acceptance forms the contract, and the added term enters unless it materially alters the deal.

Arbitration clauses are commonly held material alterations, waiving the right to court, so the term likely drops out, though Mills can argue industry custom; either way a contract formed March 4 on 2,000 pounds at 1.10. Baker's March 6 call is therefore not a revocation, there was no open offer to revoke, but an anticipatory repudiation of a formed contract, entitling Mills to suspend performance and sue. Remedies, with the arithmetic shown: contract minus market damages give Mills 1.10 minus 0.90 times 2,000, equal to 400 dollars, plus incidental costs of tender, or alternatively resale damages if Mills resells commercially reasonably at the lower price; mitigation asks only that Mills not inflate the loss, and reselling milled flour satisfies it.

One flag closes the answer: if Baker argues the March 6 call was retraction eligible, it fails, repudiation was not retracted before Mills changed position by tendering. Notice the harvest: every communication labeled, the 2-207 fight both ways, the numbers used.

Drill two: the promise without a price tag (15 minutes)

Nadia's uncle tells her: If you turn down that consulting job and finish a coding bootcamp instead, I will give you 10,000 dollars when you graduate. Nadia declines the job, pays 4,000 in bootcamp tuition, and completes the program.

The uncle refuses to pay. Advise Nadia.

Self grading key

Full credit runs three theories in order. Consideration: was the promise bargained for, Nadia's forbearance of the job and completion of the program as the price of the promise, against the uncle's argument that this was a conditional gift, the condition merely describing how to receive generosity; the classic forbearance analysis controls and both sides must appear. Promissory estoppel as the standing backup: a promise reasonably expected to induce reliance, actual reliance in the declined job and 4,000 tuition, injustice absent enforcement, with the remedy possibly limited to reliance.

Statute of frauds, dismissed in one line: performable within a year and no suretyship, so no writing required, and saying why it does not apply earns the point that silence forfeits. Damages close it: expectation of 10,000 if consideration holds, reliance of 4,000 plus the job's value under estoppel. Score yourself down if promissory estoppel never appeared; the backup theory is the question's second half.

Where to find more, in order

Your professor's past exams first, always. Then the Examples and Explanations problem sets, whose formation and remedies chapters are the best commercial drills in the 1L canon, then other released exams at your school. Convert every miss into an outline repair through the error log, feeding the two column document from the outline guide.

FAQ

How do I practice the damages math specifically?

Isolate it: take any remedies fact pattern, set ten minutes, and write only the remedies block, formula, numbers, mitigation line. Five of those reps make the math automatic before it ever costs exam minutes.

What if my answer labeled a communication differently than the model?

Check whether you argued it: a defensible label with both sides shown often earns near full credit, while the right label asserted without reasoning earns less. The log entry is the reasoning gap, not the label.

Are flashcards useful for Contracts?

For the closed lists, statute of frauds categories, 2-207's structure, the damages formulas, yes. For everything else the timeline drill is the flashcard: the course tests sequences, not definitions.

Written by Ali, Georgetown Law, founder of Lovare Institut.

Book a call