Promises in requirements contracts are not illusionary even

Question

Concerning capacity, which is true?

1. A person who lacks capacity to contract may nevertheless be compelled to pay the reasonable value for necessities furnished by another party.
2. The defense of intoxication is an excellent contract defense, roughly equivalent in quality to infancy and incompetency.
3. One who entered into a contract while intoxicated need not later disaffirm the contract in order to avoid being bounded by it because such contract is void.
4. As a general rule, an adult's contract with a minor is voidable at the option of either party.

Concerning consideration, which of the following is a true statement?

1. Promises in Requirements Contracts are not illusionary, even though such contracts do not specify an exact quantity of goods to be purchased.
2. The inadequacy of consideration is usually a good basis to avoid a contract.
3. An Exclusive Dealing Contract is one type of contract which is illusory because it lacks consideration.
4. Moral obligations and consideration given in the past can usually be used to support the consideration element in a current exchange.