subject
Business, 09.04.2020 17:05 allenlog000

Jane operates a home decorations shop selling slightly used goods. She bought a painting from Sally for the shop. Bob came into the shop and asked if the painting was by Bill, a local artist of some repute. Jane, without checking with Sally, says, "I'm sure it is" because she really did think it looked like one of Bill's paintings. Bob bought the painting. A week or so later, he took the painting by Bill's studio. Bill just laughed and said that he never painted anything that horrible. Bob took the painting back to Jane and asked for a refund. Jane refused on the basis that she never gave refunds and that Bob took the risk that the painting was not done by Bill. Should Bob sue in small claims court, who will likely win and why?a. Bob on the basis of negligent misrepresentation.

b. Bob on the basis of innocent misrepresentation.

c. Jane both on the basis that Bob accepted the risk of loss and on the basis that he agreed by verbal contract to purchase the painting.

d. Jane on the basis that Bob accepted the risk of loss.

e. Bob on the basis of unilateral mistake.

ansver
Answers: 2

Another question on Business

question
Business, 21.06.2019 15:30
Jen heard that the bank where she kept her money was going to close for good. jen said she wasn't worried
Answers: 3
question
Business, 22.06.2019 07:50
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?
Answers: 2
question
Business, 22.06.2019 09:30
An object that is clicked on and takes the presentation to a new targeted file is done through a
Answers: 2
question
Business, 22.06.2019 11:30
Florence invested in a factory requiring. federally-mandated reductions in carbon emissions. how will this impact florence as the factory's owner? a. her factory will be worth less once the upgrades are complete. b. her factory will likely be bought by the epa. c. florence will have to invest a large amount of capital to update the factory for little financial gain. d. florence will have to invest a large amount of capital to update the factory for a large financial gain.
Answers: 1
You know the right answer?
Jane operates a home decorations shop selling slightly used goods. She bought a painting from Sally...
Questions
question
Chemistry, 04.06.2020 09:57
question
Mathematics, 04.06.2020 09:57
question
Mathematics, 04.06.2020 09:57
question
Mathematics, 04.06.2020 09:57
Questions on the website: 13722360