217k views
0 votes
Jeff has a trucking company, and enters into a contract with a new client to transport 55 unmarked crates from New York City to Cleveland. When Jeff arrives in Cleveland with the load of crates, he discovers that they are full of illegal drugs, something he did not know before. Which of the following is not true?

A. Jeff can enforce the contract for the full amount of the price to transport the crates.

B. Jeff cannot enforce the contract if he had reason to know that the crates contained illegal goods.

C. The contract is void and unenforceable no matter what.

D. Jeff is an innocent party in this situation.

User Forcewill
by
8.9k points

1 Answer

4 votes

Final answer:

The contract involving the transportation of illegal drugs is void and unenforceable, meaning Jeff cannot enforce the contract for payment even if he did not know the contents were illegal. The untrue statement among the options given is that Jeff can enforce the contract for the full amount. the statement that is not true is Option A: Jeff can enforce the contract for the full amount of the price to transport the crates. Since the transportation involves illegal drugs, the contract is likely void, and enforcement would not typically be allowed by the courts.

Step-by-step explanation:

The situation described involves a contract for the transportation of goods that turns out to involve illegal substances. Under the law, contracts that involve illegal activities are generally considered void and unenforceable. This is because they lack a lawful object, which is one of the essential elements required for a contract to be considered valid. In this specific scenario, Jeff, the owner of a trucking company, did not know that the crates he was transporting contained illegal drugs.

Option A states that Jeff can enforce the contract for the full amount of the transportation price. This statement would typically be true if the contract were legal. However, since the goods in question are illegal, enforcing the contract could be problematic. Option B suggests that if Jeff had reason to know that the crates contained illegal goods, he cannot enforce the contract. This is in line with legal principles that you cannot enforce a contract that you knew or should have known involves illegal activities. Option C asserts that the contract is void and unenforceable no matter what, which is generally accurate when it comes to contracts involving illegal goods, regardless of whether Jeff knew about the contents or not. Finally, Option D posits that Jeff is an innocent party in this situation. If he truly did not know about the drugs, he might be considered an innocent party with respect to the crime, but the contract itself is still problematic from a legal standpoint.

User Simon Schubert
by
8.3k points