The court probably held that?

Question

Loeb & Company orally agreed with Schreiner, a farmer, for Schreiner to sell Loeb 150 bales of cotton, each weighing 480 pounds, at 34 cents per pound. Loeb sent Schreiner a letter confirming the terms of the agreement. 5chreiner neither acknowledged receipt of the letter nor objected to its terms. When delivery came due, Schreiner sold his cotton on the open market, because the price of cotton had more than doubled since he talked to Loeb. It filed a lawsuit against Schreiner in state court alleging breach of contract. The court probably held that Loeb:
A.Could recover, because the Uniform Commercial Code's (UCC) Article 2 Statute of Frauds requirements were
met
B. Could not recover, because farm products are not considered goods under the UCC
C. Could recover, because the contract price exceeded $500
D. Could not recover, because the UCC's Article 2 Statute of Frauds requirements were not met

Answer 1

Article Two requires a written and signed contract, which did not exist in this case. Most likely, a court would rule that no breach of contract occurred.

 

Option D