Harry has two houses, a house on the lake and a house in town. Rebecca wants to buy the house on the lake. Harry and Rebecca orally agree that Rebecca will buy the house on the lake for $300,000. Harry hurriedly writes out a contract providing that he would sell "his house" to Rebecca for $300,000 and Harry signs the top of the document. Rebecca does not sign at all. No merger clause is included in the contract. Harry backs out of the contract, and Rebecca sues him. He tells the judge that the statute of frauds is left unsatisfied because he did not sign the document at the end and also because Rebecca did not sign at all. Then, Harry also says that even if the agreement exists (I'm not saying it does or doesn't) Rebecca told him he could take off $25,000 as a housewarming gift.

1)Is there an enforceable agreement? Which elements of an enforceable agreement exist?

2)Why or why not is there an enforceable agreement? Can Rebecca sue him?

3)Can Harry testify about the $20,000 gift? Why or why not?

Following is stanley black & decker’s income statement for 2016 (in millions): stanley black & decker, inc. income statement for the year ended december 31, 2016 ($ millions) sales $11,406.9 cost of goods sold 7,139.7 gross profit $ 4,267.2 selling, general and administrative expenses 2,602.0 other operating expenses 268.2 operating income 1,397.0 interest and other nonoperating expenses 171.3 income before income tax 1,225.7 income tax expense 261.2 net income $ 964.5 compute stanley black & decker’s gross profit margin.

Nell and kirby are in the process of negotiating their divorce agreement. what should be the tax consequences to nell and kirby if the following, considered individually, became part of the agreement? a. in consideration for her one-half interest in their personal residence, kirby will transfer to nell stock with a value of $200,000 and $50,000 of cash. kirby's cost of the stock was $150,000, and the value of the personal residence is $500,000. they purchased the residence three years ago for $300,000.nell's basis for the stock is $ xkirby's basis in the house is $ xb. nell will receive $1,000 per month for 120 months. if she dies before receiving all 120 payments, the remaining payments will be made to her estate.the payments (qualify, do not qualify) as alimony and are (included in, excluded from) nell's gross income as they are received.c. nell is to have custody of their 12-year-old son, bobby. she is to receive $1,200 per month until bobby (1) dies or (2) attains age 21 (whichever occurs first). after either of these events occurs, nell will receive only $300 per month for the remainder of her life.$ x per month is alimony that is (included in, excluded from) nell's gross income, and the remaining $ x per month is considered (child support, property settlement) and is (nontaxable, taxable) to nell.

Coca-cola was primarily known for its core competencies in marketing, bottling, and distributing aerated drinks. however, with the success of gatorade, coca-cola developed competencies in the development and marketing of its own sports drink, powerade. which of the following is true of coca-cola? a. it is leveraging existing core competencies to improve current market position. b. it is building new core competencies to protect and extend its current market position. c. it is redeploying and recombining existing core competencies to compete in markets of the future. d. it is targeting the chasm between the early adopter and early majority market segment.