[Anonymous]

I came across the following question in Wiley:

When there has been no performance by either party, which of the following events generally will result in the discharge of a party’s obligation to perform as required under the original contract?

Accord and Satisfaction Mutual Rescission

A. NO NO

B. Yes Yes

C. Yes No

D. No Yes

Explanation: A is the correct answer. The requirement is to identify factors that will discharge a party’s obligation to perform under a contract. A contract may be discharged by either an accord and satisfaction or a mutual decision because in the first case, both parties to the contract have agreed to satisfy the contract in a different fashion. In the second case, both parties have mutually agreed to rescind or not go through with the contract. Therefore, A is correct.

I am not sure if I am reading the question wrong or what. I am reading that it wants to know what will discharge a party from a contract. I thought they both discharged the party’s obligation to perform but Wiley is saying neither discharge the party based on them saying A is the correct answer.

HELP ME PLEASE!!

[Tina82]

I think the question is asking which will discharge the party from performing under the ORIGINAL contract. In both of these these are still considered parties to the original contract. Only when you have a novation, the parties can be discharged from the ORIGINAL contract – where a new 3rd party becomes a party to that same contract. Does that make sense?

R - 74;88
A - 84
B - 74;89
F - no study = 67; May 15 = 87 & done

[Tina82]

ie. you and I enter into a contract for me to sell the berries you grow on your farm in the summer of 2012

accord and satisfaction – you grow berries, I sell them – contract fulfilled

mutual recission – you decide not to sell berries or I say I don't want to sell your berries, we both agree and we recind our contract

novation – I say to you, I don't want to sell your berries, but Jeff can. If you agree for Jeff to sell your berries there is a novation, I'm released from my duty to you to sell the berries and Jeff becomes the substituted party to the original contract.

R - 74;88
A - 84
B - 74;89
F - no study = 67; May 15 = 87 & done

[Anonymous]

Not really because in the Becker book it specifically states the following:

An accord is an agreement to substitute one contract for another and satisfaction is the execution of the accord. Accord and satisfaction discharges the original duty. Until the accord is satisfied a party may sue under the original contract or the accord. A substituted contract is very similar to an accord and satisfaction case but the duties under the original contract are discharged immediately.

The Wiley explanation even says a contract may be discharged by either. If they were asking which would discharge the original parties of the contract then Novation is the only way but the wording says discharges the duty to perform. I am getting myself so confused! Maybe I am over complicating this?

[nolifecpa]

An accord suspends, but does not discharge, the duty.

For mutual recession to take place, the parties must make another agreement that also satisfies the legal requirements of a contract

REG-65,71,74,73,70,74,79
BEC-60's,60's,69,71,76*,78
FAR-67,66,65,79
AUD-54,60's,65,83*,69,80
*expired

DONE

[Anonymous]

So is Becker wrong because it specifically states that ‘Accord and satisfaction discharges the original duty.'

[nolifecpa]

accord and satisfaction does not discharge a preexisting duty until the agreed upon, alternate performance occurs. the question said there has been no performance by either party

REG-65,71,74,73,70,74,79
BEC-60's,60's,69,71,76*,78
FAR-67,66,65,79
AUD-54,60's,65,83*,69,80
*expired

DONE

[Tina82]

Apologies, I confused the terms. Still think novation is the only way to discharge original duty.

R - 74;88
A - 84
B - 74;89
F - no study = 67; May 15 = 87 & done

[Anonymous]

I am more confused…I will just move on. Maybe a fresh look at it in a couple hours when I am not frustrated will help it make sense.

[Tina82]

Accord = agreement to substitute once contract for another

Satisfaction = execution of the accord

Substituted contract = similar to accord & satisfaction; but duties under original contract are discharged immediately

Novation = substitution of a new party for the old party to a contract

This seems like one of those somewhat poorly worded questions. Perhaps focusing on the first part, when there has been no performance by either party makes more sense. In the Becker book it says that “accord and satisfaction” discharge the original duty, however this implies performance. The Wiley question specifically points to a situation where there has been no performance, I suppose when contract has been executed but no performance yet occured.

Anyone else with insight please post in case I need to take REG again. Probably shouldn't be talking since I failed it 🙂

R - 74;88
A - 84
B - 74;89
F - no study = 67; May 15 = 87 & done

[Author]

Replies