ethels exercise world plans to order three weight machines from petes push, pedal and pull, inc. for a total…

ethels exercise world plans to order three weight machines from petes push, pedal and pull, inc. for a total of $15,000. petes demands that ethels friend, moneybags, a wealthy independent businesswoman (not connected with ethels business in any way) promise to pay petes for the three machines if ethels exercise world does not. which of the promises in this problem must be in writing to be enforceable? the promise made by ethels exercise world to buy the weight machines. moneybags promise to pay if ethels exercise world doesnt. both moneybags promise and ethels exercise worlds promise. none of the promises in this problem need to be in writing.

ethels exercise world plans to order three weight machines from petes push, pedal and pull, inc. for a total of $15,000. petes demands that ethels friend, moneybags, a wealthy independent businesswoman (not connected with ethels business in any way) promise to pay petes for the three machines if ethels exercise world does not. which of the promises in this problem must be in writing to be enforceable? the promise made by ethels exercise world to buy the weight machines. moneybags promise to pay if ethels exercise world doesnt. both moneybags promise and ethels exercise worlds promise. none of the promises in this problem need to be in writing.

Answer

Brief Explanations:

Under the Statute of Frauds, a promise to answer for the debt of another (a suretyship) must be in writing to be enforceable. Ethel's Exercise World's promise to buy the machines is a basic contract for goods (though over $500, but the key here is the suretyship aspect). Moneybags' promise is a suretyship (promising to pay if Ethel's doesn't). So only Moneybags' promise (as a surety) needs to be in writing.

Answer:

Moneybag's promise to pay if Ethel's Exercise World doesn't.