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 11, Problem 4Q
Summary Introduction
To discuss: The reason why whether person A be able to compliance the release.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solutionStudents have asked these similar questions
Michael, a minor, operates a one-man automobile repair shop. Anderson, having heard of Michael’s good work on other cars, takes her car to Michael’s shop for a thorough engine overhaul. Michael, while overhauling Anderson’s engine, carelessly fits an unsuitable piston ring on one of the pistons, with the result that Anderson’s engine is seriously damaged. Michael offers to return the sum that Anderson paid him for his work, but refusesto pay for the damage. Can Anderson recover from Michael in tort for the damage to her engine? Why or why not?
swiper steals Dora's gold watch and sells it to Marni for $100. Marni does not know that Swiper stole the watch from Dora.In a lawsuit by Dora against Swiper and Marni,
a.
has no recourse against Swiper or Marni
b.
Dora may not obtain the watch back from Marni
c.
has the legal right to a return of the watch from Marni
d.
may demand that Swiper buy her a new watch that looks like the one he stole from her.
Joseph M. Billy was an employee of the USM Corporation (USM), a publicly held corporation. Billy was at work when a 4,600-pound ram from a vertical boring mill broke loose and crushed him to death. Billy’s widow sued, alleging that the accident was caused by certain defects in the manufacture and design of the vertical boring mill and the two moving parts directly involved in the accident, a metal lifting arm and the 4,600-pound ram. If Mrs. Billy’s suit is successful, can the shareholders of USM be held personally liable for any judgment against USM? Explain your answer.
Chapter 11 Solutions
Smith and Roberson’s Business Law
Ch. 11 - Prob. 1COCh. 11 - Prob. 2COCh. 11 - Prob. 3COCh. 11 - Prob. 4COCh. 11 - Prob. 5COCh. 11 - Prob. 1QCh. 11 - Prob. 2QCh. 11 - Prob. 3QCh. 11 - Prob. 4QCh. 11 - Prob. 5Q
Ch. 11 - Prob. 6QCh. 11 - Prob. 7QCh. 11 - Prob. 8QCh. 11 - Prob. 9QCh. 11 - Prob. 10CPCh. 11 - Prob. 11CPCh. 11 - Prob. 12CPCh. 11 - Prob. 13CPCh. 11 - Prob. 14CPCh. 11 - Prob. 15CPCh. 11 - Prob. 16CPCh. 11 - Prob. 17CPCh. 11 - Prob. 18CPCh. 11 - Prob. 19CPCh. 11 - Prob. 20CPCh. 11 - Prob. 21CPCh. 11 - Prob. 22CPCh. 11 - Prob. 23CPCh. 11 - Prob. 1TSCh. 11 - Prob. 2TSCh. 11 - Prob. 3TS
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Columbia University brought suit against Jacobsen on two notes signed by him and his parents. The notes represented the balance of tuition he owed the University. Jacobsen counterclaimed for money damages due to Columbia’s deceit or fraudulent misrepresentation. Jacobsen argues that Columbia fraudulently misrepresented that it would teach wisdom, truth, character, enlightenment, and similar virtues and qualities. He specifically cites as support the Columbia motto: “in lumine tuo videbimus lumen” (“In your light we shall see light”); the inscription over the college chapel: “Wisdom dwelleth in the heart of him that hath understanding”; and various excerpts from its brochures, catalogues, and a convocation address made by the University’s president. Jacobsen, a senior who was not graduated because of poor scholastic standing, claims that the University’s failure to meet its promises made through these quotations constituted fraudulent misrepresentation or deceit. Decision?arrow_forwardunder the NCC, what are the different acts or omissions of the obligor or debtor which will result in the breach of the obligation for which he can be held liable for damages?arrow_forwardAn intruder entered through a window and raped McCutchen in her apartment. MCutchen sued the landlord, Ten Associates, for failure to provide adequate security and failure to warn her of the risk of intrusion through the window. Ten Associates claimed that they had no way of anticipating an intruder. Evidence was introduced that revealed the landlord knew or should have known of a prior rape and numerous intrusions through apartment windows. Does it appear that Ten Associates was negligent in providing for the security of tenants?arrow_forward
- Riffe, while serving as an officer of Wilshire Oil Company, received a secret commission for work he did on behalf of a competing corporation. Can Wilshire Oil recover these secret profits and, in addition, recover the compensation paid to Riffe by Wilshire Oil during the period that he acted on behalf of the competitor? Explain.arrow_forwardJohn 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_forwardWilliam E. Story agreed to pay his nephew, William E. Story II, a large sum of money (for purposes of this hypothetical, $500,000 in today's dollars) "if he would refrain from drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until he should come to be 21 years of age." William II had been using tobacco and occasionally drank liquor but refrained from using these stimulants over several years until he was 21 and also lived up to the other requirements of his uncle's offer. Just after William II's 21st birthday, Story acknowledged that William II had fulfilled his part of the bargain and advised that the money would be invested for him with interest. Story died, and his executor, Sidway, refused to pay William II because he believed the contract between Story and William II was without consideration. Sidway asserted that Story received no benefit from William II's performance and William II suffered no detriment (in fact, by his refraining from the use…arrow_forward
- Renee hires Benjamin to buy a rare antique car and stresses that it must have all original parts. After many months of searching, Benjamin finds the car Renee wants, but learns the car had one of its mirrors replaced recently. Benjamin decides not to tell Renee about the replacement because he knows that Renee will tell him to keep looking, and he believes the replacement was of minor consequence. Benjamin has breached his fiduciary duty to Renee. acted with common sense. O executed an illegal contract. O acted in the best interests of Renee, as finding the car Renee wanted was impossible.arrow_forwardThe Brineys (defendants) owned a large farm on which was located an abandoned farmhouse. For a ten-year period the house had been the subject of several trespassings and housebreakings. In an attempt to stop the intrusions, Briney boarded up the windows and doors and posted “no trespassing” signs. After one break-in, however, Briney set a spring gun in a bedroom. It was placed over the bedroom window so that the gun could not be seen from outside, and no warning of its presence was posted. The gun was set to hit an intruder in the legs. Briney loaded the gun with a live shell, but he claimed that he did not intend to injure anyone. Katko (plaintiff) and a friend, McDonough, had broken into the abandoned farmhouse on an earlier occasion to steal old bottles and fruit jars for their antique collection. They returned for a second time after the spring gun had been set, and Katko was seriously wounded in the leg when the gun discharged as he entered the bedroom. He then brought action for…arrow_forwardPauline Brown was shot and seriously injured by an unknown assailant in the parking lot of National Supermarkets. Pauline and George Brown brought a negligence action against National, Sentry Security Agency, and T. G. Watkins, a security guard and Sentry employee. Sentry had a security contract with National. The Browns maintained that the defendants have a legal duty to protect National’s customers both in the store and in the parking lot, and that this duty was breached. The defendants denied this allegation. What will the Browns have to prove to prevail? Explain.arrow_forward
- Peter Andrus owned an apartment building that he had insured under a fire insurance policy sold by J.C. Durick Insurance (Durick). Two months prior to the expiration of the policy, Durick notified Andrus that the building should be insured for $48,000 (or 80 percent of the building’s value), as required by the insurance company. Andrus replied that (1) he wanted insurance to match the amount of the outstanding mortgage on the building (i.e., $24,000) and (2) if Durick could not sell this insurance, he would go elsewhere. Durick sent a new insurance policy in the face amount of $48,000 with the notation that the policy was automatically accepted unless Andrus notified him to the contrary. Andrus did not reply. However, he did not pay the premiums on the policy. Durick sued Andrus to recover these premiums. Discuss who wins? Provide justification for your argument/position.arrow_forwardJoseph Eugene Dodson, age sixteen, purchased a used pickup truck from Burns and Mary Shrader. The Shraders owned and operated Shrader’s Auto Sales. Dodson paid $14,900 in cash for the truck. At the time of sale, the Shraders did not question Dodson’s age, but thought he was eighteen or nineteen. Dodson made no misrepresentation concerning his age. Nine months after the date of purchase, the truck began to develop mechanical problems. A mechanic diagnosed the problem as a burnt valve but could not be certain. Dodson, who could not afford the repairs, continued to drive the truck until one month later, when the engine “blew up.” Dodson parked the vehicle in the front yard of his parents’ home and contacted the Shraders to rescind the purchase of the truck and to request a full refund. a. What arguments would support Dodson’s termination of the contract? b. What arguments would support Shrader’s position that the contract is not voidable? c. Which side should prevail? Explain.arrow_forwardIf a party can demonstrate that they took all reasonable precautions and were not negligent in their activities, they cannot be convicted of a strict liability offence. True or Falsearrow_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