Which of the following is a corporation that has not substantially met the requirements of the state incorporation statute, but courts recognize it as a corporation to shield individual shareholders from personal liability if the shareholders can prove they made a good faith effort to meet the requirements of state incorporation and the business has already conducted business?

What is ur favorite song and by who i know dis is a random question

1. the political environment in india has proven to be critical to company performance for both pepsico and coca-cola india. what specific aspects of the political environment have played key roles? could these effects have been anticipated prior to market entry? if not, could developments in the political arena have been handled better by each company? 2. timing of entry into the indian market brought different results for pepsico and coca-cola india. what benefits or disadvantages accrued as a result of earlier or later market entry? 3. the indian market is enormous in terms of population and geography. how have the two companies responded to the sheer scale of operations in india in terms of product policies, promotional activities, pricing policies, and distribution arrangements? 4. “global localization” (glocalization) is a policy that both companies have implemented successfully. give examples for each company from the case.

In december of 2004, the company you own entered into a 20-year contract with a grain supplier for daily deliveries of grain to its hot dog bun manufacturing facility. the contract called for "10,000 pounds of grain" to be delivered to the facility at the price of $100,000 per day. until february 2017, the supplier provided processed grain which could easily be used in your manufacturing process. however, no longer wanting to absorb the cost of having the grain processed, the supplier began delivering whole grain. the supplier is arguing that the contract does not specify the type of grain that would be supplied and that it has not breached the contract. your company is arguing that the supplier has an onsite processing plant and processed grain was implicit to the terms of the contract. over the remaining term of the contract, reshipping and having the grain processed would cost your company approximately $10,000,000, opposed to a cost of around $1,000,000 to the supplier. after speaking with in-house counsel, it was estimated that litigation would cost the company several million dollars and last for years. weighing the costs of litigation, along with possible ambiguity in the contract, what are three options you could take to resolve the dispute? which would be the best option for your business and why?