Law for Accountants. 3 questions (Each answer 350-450 words)
Law for Accountants. 3 questions (Each answer 350-450 words)
100% original and no plagiarism (Each answer 350-450 words) APA format with references (Book attached)
11–4. Shipment and Destination Contracts – In 2003, Karen Pearson and Steve and Tara Carlson agreed to buy a 2004 Dynasty recreational vehicle (RV) from DeMartini’s RV Sales in Grass Valley, California. On September 29, Pearson, the Carlson’s, and DeMartini’s signed a contract providing that “seller agrees to deliver the vehicle to you on the date this contract is signed.” The buyers made a payment of $145,000 on the total price of $356,416 the next day, when they also signed a form acknowledging that the RV had been inspected and accepted. They agreed to return later to have the RV transported out of state for delivery (to avoid paying state sales tax on the purchase). On October 7, Steve Carlson returned to DeMartini’s to ride with the seller’s driver to Nevada to consummate the out-of-state delivery. When the RV developed problems, Pearson and the Carlson’s fi led a suit in a federal district court against the RV’s manufacturer, Monaco Coach Corp., alleging, in part, breach of warranty under state law. The applicable statute is expressly limited to goods sold in California. Monaco argued that this RV had been sold in Nevada. How does the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) define a sale? What does the UCC provide with respect to the passage of title? How do these provisions apply here? Discuss. [Carlson v. Monaco Coach Corp., 486 F.Supp.2d 1127 (E.D.Cal. 2007)]
Need assignment help for this question?
If you need assistance with writing your essay, we are ready to help you!
OUR PROCESS
Order
Payment
Writing
Delivery
Why Choose Us: Cost-efficiency, Plagiarism free, Money Back Guarantee, On-time Delivery, Total Сonfidentiality, 24/7 Support, 100% originality
11–5. Additional Terms – Continental Insurance Co. issued a policy to cover shipments by Oakley Fertilizer, Inc. Oakley agreed to ship three thousand tons of fertilizer by barge from New Orleans, Louisiana, to Ameropa North America in Caruthersville, Missouri. Oakley sent Ameropa a contract form that set out these terms and stated that title and risk would pass to the buyer after the seller was paid for the goods. Ameropa e-mailed a different form that set out the same essential terms but stated that title and risk of loss would pass to the buyer when the goods were loaded onto the barges in New Orleans. The cargo was loaded onto barges but had not yet been delivered when it was damaged in Hurricane Katrina. Oakley fi led a claim for the loss with Continental but was denied coverage. Oakley fi led a suit in a Missouri state court against the insurer. Continental argued that title and risk passed to Ameropa before the damage as specified in the buyer’s form under Section 2–207(3) of the Uniform Commercial Code because the parties did not have a valid contract under UCC 2–207(1). Apply UCC 2–207 on additional terms in an acceptance to these facts. Is Continental correct? Explain. [Oakley Fertilizer, Inc. v. Continental Insurance Co., 276 S.W.3d 342 (Mo. App.E.D. 2009)]
12–7. Libel and Invasion of Privacy – The Northwest Herald, a newspaper in Illinois, regularly received e-mail reports from area police departments about criminal arrests. The paper published the information, which is proper because the reports are public records. One day, the Herald received an e-mail stating that Carolene Eubanks had been charged with theft and obstruction of justice. The paper put that information into an issue that was to be published four days later. Several hours after the original e-mail had been received, the police issued another e-mail, explaining that Eubanks had not been charged with anything; the correct name was Barbara Bradshaw. Due to a long weekend, no one at the Herald noticed the e-mail until after the paper had been published. The following day, five days after the e-mails had been received, the paper published a correction. Eubanks sued the Herald for libel and for invasion of privacy. Does Eubanks have a good case for either tort? Why or why not? [Eubanks v. Northwest Herald Newspapers, 922 N.E.2d 1196 (App.Ct.Ill. 2010)]
Book:
Cross, F. B., & Miller, R. L. (2010). The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases – Ethical, Regulatory, Global, and Corporate Issues, 8th Edition. Cengage Publishing.
