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 3, Problem 14CP
Summary Introduction
Case summary:
Persons L and D, both residents of state In, listed the sale of their car P in an online auction website E stating that the winner of the bid is responsible for arranging and payment of delivery of the car. Persons A, residents of state Id won the auction and paid through online payment service P for auction amount and arranged for delivery. They acquired the delivery, not satisfied with the car stating that car is different from shown in auction website and stopped their online payment. Persons L and D sued in courts of state ‘In’ demanding in $5,900 damages.
To discuss: If courts of state I have jurisdiction over Persons A.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Martha sells goods to James for $25,000. Martha assigns her right to receive the $25,000 to XYZ Finance James refuses to pay XYZ the $25,000. James makes two arguments for not paying. First James claims that XYZ has no privity of contract and that XYZ is not a third-party beneficiary of its contract with Martha. Second – James claims that the goods were worthless. Assume that the goods were worthless. You are the judge. Who wins and why? Address both arguments that James makes.
Khalil bought Roots Café in
New York from its previous
owner. Khalil was eating a meal
at Roots Café and mentioned
to the owner that he would like
to own a business of his own
someday. The owner also had
purchased the restaurant but
was never able to make it a
profitable business. The owner
offered to sell Khalil Roots
café. Khalil got a loan from a
family member and was able
to buy the company assets for
$8,000 less than the seller's
asking price. Through which of
the following sources has
Khalil found out that Roots
Café was for sale? *
Advertisement
Hidden market
A "for sale" sign
Restaurant association
Wells Fargo Credit Corporation (Wells Fargo) obtained a judgment of foreclosure on a house owned by Mr. and Mrs. Clevenger. The total indebtedness stated in the judgment was $207,141. The foreclosure sale was scheduled for 11:00 A.M. on a specified day at the west front door of the Hillsborough County Courthouse. Wells Fargo was represented by a paralegal, who had attended more than 1,000 similar sales. Wells Fargo’s handwritten instruction sheet informed the paralegal to make one bid at $115,000, the tax-appraised value of the property. Because the first “1” in the number was close to the “$,” the paralegal misread the bid instruction as $15,000 and opened the bidding at that amount.Harley Martin, who was attending his first judicial sale, bid $20,000. The county clerk gave ample time for another bid and then announced, “$20,000 going once, $20,000 going twice, sold to Harley… .” The paralegal screamed, “Stop, I’m sorry. I made a mistake!” The certificate of sale was issued to Martin.…
Chapter 3 Solutions
Smith and Roberson’s Business Law
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Discuss the provisions of the Companies Act related to the issue and buyback of shares, including the requirements for conducting buyback offers, the restrictions on buyback pricing, and the consequences of non-compliance.arrow_forwardJohnson, who owned a hardware store, was indebted to Hutchinson, one of her suppliers. Johnson sold her business to Lockhart, one of Johnson’s previous competitors, who combined the inventory from Johnson’s store with his own and moved them to a new, larger store. Hutchinson claims that Lockhart must pay Johnson’s debt because the sale of the business had been made without complying with the requirements of the bulk sales law. Discuss whether Lockhart is obligated to pay Hutchison’s debt to Johnson.arrow_forwardNew West Fruit Corporation (New West) and Coastal Berry Corporation are both brokers of fresh strawberries. In the second half of 2012, New West’s predecessor, Monc’s Consolidated Produce, Inc., loaned money and strawberry plants to a group of strawberry growers known as Cooperativa La Paz (La Paz). In September 2012, Monc’s and La Paz signed a “Sales and Marketing Agreement” to allow Monc’s the exclusive right to market the strawberries grown by La Paz during the 2012–2014 season. The agreement did not mention the advances of money or plants, but did give Monc’s a security interest in all crops and proceeds on specified property in the 2013–2014 season. The financing statement was properly signed and filed. Monc’s closed down in January 2014, and its assets were assigned to New West. In April, New West learned that La Paz had agreed to market its 2014 crop through Coastal Berry. New West immediately arranged a meeting to advise the Coastal Berry officers of its contract with the…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_forwardLeonard Wolfe was killed in an automobile accident while driving his Toyota Camry. The car was rendered a total loss, and Wolfe’s insurance carrier paid his estate $18,550 for damage to the vehicle. Under the terms of Wolfe’s will, any car owned at his death was to be given to his brother, David. Wolfe’s daughter, Carol, however, brought an action, claiming that the gift of the car to David was adeemed by its total destruction and that she, as the residuary legatee under the will, was entitled to the insurance proceeds. Who is entitled to the insurance proceeds?arrow_forwardHow is an offer terminated? Describe the circumstances in which a counteroffer results.arrow_forward
- Walker, the CEO of Memphis Mini Golf and Go Carts (MMGGC), wanted to sell the business to Go Carts, Golf & Games. To provide a basis for the transaction, Walker retained Blanchard, an accountant, to conduct an audit of MMGGC. Blanchard was aware that Go Carts, Golf & Games would likely use the audit report in consideration of the purchase of the business from MMGGC. Blanchard's audit report showed that MMGGC’s business was profitable. William, Go Cart’s president, relied on this report in agreeing to purchase the business of MMGGC and in agreeing to the terms of the purchase. Sometime later, it was discovered that the accountant made a number of mistakes and that the business that was sold was actually insolvent. William and Go Carts sued Walker and Blanchard for damages. The suit claimed that the accountant had negligently misrepresented the facts. Discuss the arguments for each party, determine which party should win, and provide legal support for your decision.arrow_forwardIn late 2013 or early 2014, the plaintiff, Lan England, agreed to sell 258,363 shares of stock to the defendant, Eugene Horbach, for $2.75 per share, for a total price of $710,498.25. Although the purchase money was to be paid in the first quarter of 2014, the defendant made periodic payments on the stock at least through September 2014. The parties met in May of 2015 to finalize the transaction. At this time, the plaintiff believed that the defendant owed at least $25,000 of the original purchase price. The defendant did not dispute that amount. The parties then reached a second agreement whereby the defendant agreed to pay to the plaintiff an additional $25,000 and to hold in trust 2 percent of the stock for the plaintiff. In return, the plaintiff agreed to transfer the stock and to forego his right to sue the defendant for breach of the original agreement. In December 2016, the plaintiff made a demand for the 2 percent stock, but the defendant refused, contending that the 2 percent…arrow_forwardDennis and Donna Smith owned a 10-acre tract of land that they decided to sell. The couple entered into a listing agreement with Kelly McLaughlin, a licensed real estate broker. The agreement gave Kelly the exclusive right to sell the property for a period of 6 months. The Smiths agreed to pay Kelly a 6% commission of the selling price if a buyer was found during the listing period. Four months later, the Smiths sent Kelly a letter terminating the listing agreement. Kelly did not approve of the conditions. One month later, Kelly presented a full price offer to the Smiths; however, they ignored the offer and sold the property to another buyer. Kelly sued the Smiths for breach of the agency agreement. Which party wins the lawsuit? Did the Smiths act ethically in this case?arrow_forward
- B. Hawkeye Bank & Trust and affiliated banks agreed to refer bank customers to Financial Marketing Services, Inc. (FMS) for the purchase of life insurance. Hawkeye and FMS shared the commissions. Hawkeye employees and some independent agents licensed through FMS made the actual sales; however, all insurance business was FMS’ property. Because of concern about the confidentiality of bank customer information, Hawkeye decided to terminate its contract with FMS and sell insurance directly to its customers. The independent agents claimed Hawkeye terminating the contract with FMS constituted intentional interference with the agents’ contracts and prospective relations. Was it? Explain your position.arrow_forwardJoseph and Mai each bought shares of Apple stock at $200 per share. About a week later, Joseph called his stockbroker and told him that if Apple was trading below $195, he wanted to sell. The broker was very busy, so he didn’t check but Apple was trading at $194 per share. He told Joseph that it was not below $195, so Joseph did not sell the stock. Mai also called her stockbroker that day also and told him that if Apple was trading below $195, she wanted to sell. Once again, the broker was very busy, so he didn’t check but Apple was trading at $194 per share. He told Mai that it was not below $195. However, Mai saw the price on her computer and knew it was $94. However, Mai did not sell either. Apple dropped to $180 per share by the end of the day and they both sold suffering a large loss. They both sue the brokers. What are the probable outcomes of the suits?arrow_forwardA proxy is a representative of a (shareholder, officer, director) who is liable to (vote, sell shares, buy shares) on the shareholder's behalf at a shareholder meeting. Proxy agreements are generally valid for (eleven months, twelve months, thirteen months). At the time of the shareholder meeting, Francescas's proxy agreement was (fourteen months, thirteen months, twelve months) old. Therefore, Francesca's proxy agreement with her representative (expired, did not expire), and her representative (may not, may) vote on Franscesca's behalf. What if the Facts were Different Assume that Brenda purchased Mike's 100 shares of stock and Fransesca signed a new proxy agreement on May 15, 2020. Brenda's purchase of stock on May 15, 2020, is (after, before) the record date. On the record date, (Mike, Brenda) is the owner of the 100 shares and (may not, may) vote based on ownership of the 100 shares at the shareholder meeting. If Francesca signed a proxy agreement on May 15, 2020, it is (more…arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Understanding BusinessManagementISBN:9781259929434Author:William NickelsPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
Management (14th Edition)ManagementISBN:9780134527604Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. CoulterPublisher:PEARSON
Spreadsheet 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:PEARSON
Business Essentials (12th Edition) (What's New in...ManagementISBN:9780134728391Author:Ronald J. Ebert, Ricky W. GriffinPublisher:PEARSON
Fundamentals 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