Smith and Roberson’s Business Law
17th Edition
ISBN: 9781337094757
Author: Richard A. Mann, Barry S. Roberts
Publisher: Cengage Learning
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 10, Problem 21CP
Summary Introduction
Given situation:
Mr and Mrs Person M bought a used soft in the auction conducted by person A. It is a part of Place S estate, had a safe locked inside. This truth was known to both the auctioneer and person M. shortly after the auction, a locksmith, who found $32,207 inside, opened person S’s compartment.
Later the money was impounded by the police department. The town of place E brought a lawsuit against the property of place S and person M to decide the owner of the money.
To discuss: Judgement in favour of person M.
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Students have asked these similar questions
Mrs. Mieske delivered 32 fifty-foot reels of developed movie film to the Bartell Drug Company to be spliced together into four reels for viewing convenience. She placed the films, which contained irreplaceable pictures of her family’s activities over a period of years, into the order in which they were to be spliced and then delivered them to the manager of Bartell. The manager placed a film-processing packet on the bag of films and gave Mrs. Mieske a receipt that stated, “We assume no responsibility beyond retail cost of film unless otherwise agreed to in writing.” Although the disclaimer was not discussed, Mrs. Mieske’s parting words to the store manager were, “Don’t lose these. They are my life.” Bartell sent the film to its processing agent, GAF Corporation, which intended to send them to another processing lab for splicing. While at the GAF laboratory, however, the film was accidentally placed in the garbage dumpster and was never recovered. Upon learning of the loss of their…
On March 17, Peckham bought a new car from Larsen Chevrolet for $16,400. During the first one and one-half months after the purchase, Peckham discovered that the car’s hood was dented, its gas tank contained no baffles, its emergency brake was inoperable, the car did not have a jack or a spare tire, and neither the clock nor the speedometer worked. Larsen claimed that Peckham knew of the defects at the time of the purchase. Peckham, on the other hand, claimed that he did not know the extent of the defects and that despite his repeated efforts the defects were not repaired until June 11. Then, on July 15, the car’s dashboard caught fire, leaving the car’s interior damaged and the car itself inoperable. Peckham then returned to Larsen Chevrolet and told Larsen that he had to repair the car at his own expense or that he, Peckham, would either rescind the contract or demand a new automobile. Peckham also claimed that at the end of their conversation he notified Larsen Chevrolet that he was…
Marge sold her car to Rupert, her very good friend on credit for $100,000. He paid down $30,000, but after a few months, and having not seeing Rupert, Marge decided to take back the car. Lucky for her, she did not give Rupert the papers for the car. She saw Henry with the car, who told her that Rupert sold it to him and promised to give him the papers soon;
i. Can Rupert keep the car? why or why not.
ii. Can Marge get back the car? why or why not.
iii. Would the situation be different if Marge had given Rupert the papers
for the car?
iv. What type of contract did Rupert and Henry enter into?
Chapter 10 Solutions
Smith and Roberson’s Business Law
Ch. 10 - Prob. 1COCh. 10 - Prob. 2COCh. 10 - Prob. 3COCh. 10 - Prob. 4COCh. 10 - Prob. 5COCh. 10 - Prob. 1QCh. 10 - Prob. 2QCh. 10 - Prob. 3QCh. 10 - Prob. 4QCh. 10 - Prob. 5Q
Ch. 10 - Prob. 6QCh. 10 - Prob. 7QCh. 10 - Prob. 8QCh. 10 - Prob. 9QCh. 10 - Prob. 10QCh. 10 - Prob. 11QCh. 10 - Prob. 12QCh. 10 - Prob. 13QCh. 10 - Prob. 14CPCh. 10 - Prob. 15CPCh. 10 - Prob. 16CPCh. 10 - Prob. 17CPCh. 10 - Prob. 18CPCh. 10 - Prob. 19CPCh. 10 - Prob. 20CPCh. 10 - Prob. 21CPCh. 10 - Prob. 22CPCh. 10 - Prob. 23CPCh. 10 - Prob. 1TSCh. 10 - Prob. 2TSCh. 10 - Prob. 3TS
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Mary has lost her lamb. On Sunday, she ran an ad in the local paper offering $2000 to anyone who has information that would lead to the return of her lamb. On Monday, as he was leaving his village store on a four day business trip, Noah saw a lamb behind some barrels in the alley behind the store. Since he was late, he scribbled a note with the directionsBut Mary was not home. She wrote a note and stuck it under Mary's door. Mary was despondent about her lamb and spent Tuesday night commiserating with her. Mr Matilda's not returning home until Wednesday morning. Passing by the village store, however, she heard a little bleat and could hardly believe her eyes when she saw her beloved lamb standing in front of her. Nor did she notice that the lamb, hungrier than usual, ate Chili's note that was on the floor as they entered their house on Thursday. John remembered that he had seen a lamb at the village store earlier that week and hurried over to Mary's house, only to find the lamb already…arrow_forwardLiability for a Lost ATM Card Joshua Franz, of Oxford, Mississippi, earned $4,600 during the summer and put $3,000 of the money in a newly opened savings account for use during the school year. It is now November 4th and Joshua went to the bank to withdraw some cash. The teller informed him that there was only $2,100 in the account. When Joshua protested, the teller informed him that there had been three ATM $300 withdrawals from the account on the last day of the month in August, September and October. Joshua typically neglects to open the statements he had received on the third day of each month. When he got home he could not find the ATM card he had received when he opened the account in August and recalled that he had found his car door open in his parking lot in late August but had thought nothing was taken. When he opened the statements he saw the record of each of the withdrawals. He went immediately back to the bank to tell them of the loss. How much money will Joshua lose…arrow_forwardA received from X a pendant with diamonds valued at P400,500 to be sold on commission basis or to be returned on demand. In the evening of February 1, 2020, while walking home to her residence, two men snatched her purse containing the pendant and ran away. Subsequently, the snatchers were apprehended and charged. During the pendency of the criminal case, X brought an action against A for recovery of the pendant or of its value and damages. The latter interposed the defense of fortuitous event, but the former contends: (a) that the defense of fortuitous event is untenable because there was negligence on the part of the defendant; and (b) that if the defense is tenable, nevertheless, there must be a prior conviction for robbery before it can be availed of. Decide the case.arrow_forward
- John Torniero was employed by Micheals Jewelers, Inc. (Micheals). During the course of his employment, Torniero stole pieces of jewelry, including several diamond rings, a sapphire ring, a gold pendant, and several loose diamonds. Over a period of several months, Torniero sold individual pieces of the stolen jewelry to G&W Watch and Jewelry Corporation (G&W). G&W had no knowledge of how Torniero obtained the jewels. Torniero was arrested when Micheals discovered the thefts. After Torniero admitted that he had sold the stolen jewelry to G&W, Micheals attempted to recover it from G&W. G&W claimed title to the jewelry as a good faith purchaser for value. Micheals challenged G&W’s claim to title in court. Who wins? Explain your reasoning.arrow_forwardExecutive Financial Services, Inc. (EFS), purchased three tractors from Tri-County Farm Company (Tri-County), a John Deere dealership owned by Gene Mohr and James Loyd. The tractors cost $48,000, $19,000, and $38,000. EFS did not take possession of the tractors but instead left the tractors on Tri-County’s lot. EFS leased the tractors to Mohr-Loyd Leasing (Mohr-Loyd), a partnership between Mohr and Loyd, with the understanding and representation by Mohr-Loyd that the tractors would be leased out to farmers. Instead of leasing the tractors, Tri-County sold them to three different farmers. EFS sued and obtained judgment against Tri-County, Mohr-Loyd, and Mohr and Loyd personally for breach of contract. Because that judgment remained unsatisfied, EFS sued the three farmers who bought the tractors to recover the tractors from them. a) What does the entrustment rule provide? Explain. b) Did Mohr and Loyd act ethically in this case? c) Who owns the tractors, EFS or the farmers?arrow_forwardSmith was approached by a man who introduced himself as Brown of Brown & Co. Brown was not known to Smith, but Smith asked Dun & Bradstreet for a credit report and obtained a very favorable report on Brown. He thereupon sold Brown some expensive gems and billed Brown & Co. “Brown” turned out to be a clever jewel thief, who later sold the gems to Brown & Co. for valuable consideration. Brown & Co. was unaware of “Brown’s” transaction with Smith. Can Smith successfully sue Brown & Co. for either the return of the gems or the price as billed to Brown & Co.?arrow_forward
- Stein, a mechanic, and Beal, a life insurance agent, entered into a written contract for the sale of Stein’s tractor to Beal for $6,800 cash. It was agreed that Stein would tune the motor on the tractor. Stein fulfilled this obligation and on the night of July 1 telephoned Beal that the tractor was ready to be picked up upon Beal’s making payment. Beal responded, “I’ll be there in the morning with the money.” On the next morning, however, Beal was approached by an insurance prospect and decided to get the tractor at a later date. On the night of .July 2, the tractor was destroyed by fire of unknown origin. Neither Stein nor Beal had any fire insurance. Who must bear the loss? Why?arrow_forwardKate owned a small grocery store. One day John went to the store and purchased a can of chip dip that was, unknown to Kate or John, adulterated. John became seriously ill after eating the dip and sued Kate for damages on the grounds that she breached an implied warranty of merchantability. Is Kate liable? Why?arrow_forwardAnne Robertson obtained telescopes from the See-Well Optics Company at dealer prices on the pretense of being a dealer in optical equipment. See-Well later determined that Robertson was not, had never been, and did not plan to be a dealer in optics. By the time these facts emerged, Robertson had succeeded in selling the telescopes to several individuals located throughout the country. These buyers had responded to advertisements placed by Robertson, who again had represented herself as a dealer in optical equipment. The buyers had purchased the telescopes in good faith at prices consistent with comparable equipment. See-Well located these buyers and demanded that the telescopes be returned as property obtained through fraud. Do the buyers of these telescopes have to return their purchases?arrow_forward
- Executive Clothing Retailers Limited manufactures and sells work wear for career women. During the period July to October, 2022, they notice that some of their inventory disappeared. Only three persons have the authority to access the inventory from the warehouse. After interviewing two of them the owners realize who the culprit is. They confront the front store Manager, Samantha Charles, in the presence of the police and she confesses, stating that she appropriated the goods and cash from the business, amounting to US$50,000. The owner suggests that Samantha compensate the company rather than face criminal charges. Samantha Charles agrees and executes a document, promising to pay US$50,000 in favour of Executive Clothing Retailers Limited on November 3, 2022, indicating that her actions were not sanctioned by the Company. It is now January 3, 2023 and Samantha has not honoured her acknowledged indebtedness, to Executive Clothing Retailers Limited. 1) What type of document did she most…arrow_forwardExecutive Clothing Retailers Limited manufactures and sells work wear for career women. During the period July to October, 2022, they notice that some of their inventory disappeared. Only three persons have the authority to access the inventory from the warehouse. After interviewing two of them the owners realize who the culprit is. They confront the front store Manager, Samantha Charles, in the presence of the police and she confesses, stating that she appropriated the goods and cash from the business, amounting to US$50,000. The owner suggests that Samantha compensate the company rather than face criminal charges. Samantha Charles agrees and executes a document, promising to pay US$50,000 in favour of Executive Clothing Retailers Limited on November 3, 2022,indicating that her actions were not sanctioned by the Company. It is now January 3, 2023 and Samantha has not honoured her acknowledged indebtedness, to Executive Clothing Retailers Limited. 1) What type of document did she most…arrow_forwardThe H owned and operated a successful small bakery and grocery store. They spoke with L, an agent of Red Owl Stores, who told them that for $18,000, Red Owl would build a store and fully stock it for them. The H sold their bakery and grocery store and purchased a lot on which Red Owl was to build the store. L then told H that the price had gone up to $26,000. The H borrowed the extra money from relatives, but then L informed them that the cost would be $34,000. Negotiations broke off and the H sued. Can H win the case? Explain.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
- Understanding BusinessManagementISBN:9781259929434Author:William NickelsPublisher:McGraw-Hill EducationManagement (14th Edition)ManagementISBN:9780134527604Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. CoulterPublisher:PEARSONSpreadsheet Modeling & Decision Analysis: A Pract...ManagementISBN:9781305947412Author:Cliff RagsdalePublisher:Cengage Learning
- Management Information Systems: Managing The Digi...ManagementISBN:9780135191798Author:Kenneth C. Laudon, Jane P. LaudonPublisher:PEARSONBusiness Essentials (12th Edition) (What's New in...ManagementISBN:9780134728391Author:Ronald J. Ebert, Ricky W. GriffinPublisher:PEARSONFundamentals of Management (10th Edition)ManagementISBN:9780134237473Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter, David A. De CenzoPublisher:PEARSON
Understanding Business
Management
ISBN:9781259929434
Author:William Nickels
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education
Management (14th Edition)
Management
ISBN:9780134527604
Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter
Publisher:PEARSON
Spreadsheet Modeling & Decision Analysis: A Pract...
Management
ISBN:9781305947412
Author:Cliff Ragsdale
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Management Information Systems: Managing The Digi...
Management
ISBN:9780135191798
Author:Kenneth C. Laudon, Jane P. Laudon
Publisher:PEARSON
Business Essentials (12th Edition) (What's New in...
Management
ISBN:9780134728391
Author:Ronald J. Ebert, Ricky W. Griffin
Publisher:PEARSON
Fundamentals of Management (10th Edition)
Management
ISBN:9780134237473
Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter, David A. De Cenzo
Publisher:PEARSON