Answered: Garrett issues a promissory note to… | bartleby

Related questions

Question

100%

Garrett issues a promissory note to Caroline. The note is payable to the order of cash. In order for Caroline to transfer it to Emily, Caroline must indorse it.

True

False

Expert Solution

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Blurred answer

Similar questions

A man named Bob Smith believes that he is Santa Claus (who delivers presents to all the children around the world on Christmas Eve). In fact, he is not Santa, but he has believed this for many years. He signs his name "Santa." He signs many contracts as "Santa," and he refers to his wife as "Mrs. Claus" even though her name is actually Betty Smith. She puts up with it, because he really does believe he is Santa, and because she loves him and because his wages from his job at Hasbro toys pays the bills. One day he enters a contract with your company to hire you to build him a gigantic workshop in his backyard so he can build his toys and stable his "eight tiny reindeer." In return he will pay you $120,000 for the construction. When his wife learns of this deal, she tries to reject it because it is voidable due to his lack of contractual capacity. Was this contract voidable, or valid and enforceable? Answer the questions.
Bill offers to sell Mary his computer for $500. Mary counters with an offer of $400 Bill rejects this offer. Mary tells Bill: "OK, I'll buy the computer for $500." Bill tells Mary: "I've decided not to sell the computer after all." Bill is in breach of contract because Mary made a valid offer. True False
Ann took Bonnie’s watch before Bonnie was aware of the theft. Bonnie discovered her loss immediately and pursued Ann. Ann pointed a loaded pistol at Bonnie, who, in fear of being shot, allowed Ann to escape. Was Ann guilty of robbery? Of any other crime?
Professor Shott buys a Porsche against the wishes of his much more intelligent wife. Professor Shott soon realizes his mistake when he starts to make the car payments. Jane, a very wealthy 17 year old, offers to buy the Porsche and Professor Shott accepts. Now assume that before she turns 18 Jane gets in an accident and badly damages the Porsche causing $20,000 in damage. Assume she originally paid Professor Shott $50,000 for the car. If Jane now seeks to return the damaged car what is the result? Professor Shott must refund Jane his money minus the amount of the damages. Professor Shott does not have to refund Jane anything. Professor Shott can demand it be repaired before giving Jane a refund. Professor Shott must refund Jane 100% of his money even though he damaged the car.
Ramona Smith spilled orange juice on her computer two days before her term paper was due. Ramona desperately needed a new laptop, so she went online and found a laptop that fit her needs. She emailed the seller, Effie Frost, expressing her desire to purchase the laptop. Effie ernailed Ramona back and said that she (Effie) would sell Effie's laptop to Ramona for $300. An hour later, Ramona and Effie signed the following agreement: "1, Effie Frost, agree to sell my laptop computer to Ramona Smith for Four Hundred Dollars and zero cents. This is the entirety of the agreement. This agreement supersedes any and all other agreements made by the seller and the buyer." Ramona now claims that she should only pay $300 for the laptop because during that initial email exchange with Effie, Effie told Ramona that $300 was the price of the laptop, and she has the email exchange as evidence of the price quote of $300. What legal concept could be used to enforce the contract for $400? O Condition…
Owe
Daniel, a property developer, is selling a house to Peter, who is 25 years old and intellectually impaired. Houses of an equivalent size and quality in the area generally go for about half the price that Daniel has negotiated with Peter. Peter has paid the deposit and waived the cooling off period under the contract. Peter’s cousin, Jeremy, learns of the deal and is very concerned. Jeremy is Peter’s legal guardian. What can he do legally to help Peter? (Explain how those laws may be interpreted by existing common law and equitable rules and applied to property laws).
Lorraine and Darius are friends. Lorraine is engaged and wants to have the wedding of her dreams, but she cannot afford it. Darius wants to help with this, so he anonymously gives Lorraine $10,000. Lorraine is happy and does have the wedding of her dreams. A month later, Darius loses his job and asks Lorraine for the $10,000 back. Lorraine refuses. Darius sues Lorraine. The court will a. order Lorraine to pay Darius the money because she used the money. b. not order Lorraine to pay Darius the money because valid consideration was not present. c. order Lorraine to pay the money because anonymous gifts of money must be repaid. d. not order Lorraine to pay the money because there was nothing in writing.
Smith was approached by a man who introduced himself as Brown of Brown & Co. Brown was not known to Smith, but Smith asked Dun & Bradstreet for a credit report and obtained a very favorable report on Brown. He thereupon sold Brown some expensive gems and billed Brown & Co. “Brown” turned out to be a clever jewel thief, who later sold the gems to Brown & Co. for valuable consideration. Brown & Co. was unaware of “Brown’s” transaction with Smith. Can Smith successfully sue Brown & Co. for either the return of the gems or the price as billed to Brown & Co.?
Evaluate when a promise is enforceable, the elements of a contract, performance, and the remedies available in the event of breach.
Buyer Bert can't believe that Seller Sam has had a last-second change of heart about entering into an agreement to sell his home to Bert. Sam has offered to refund Bert's earnest money and even pay him something in acknowledgment of Bert's inconvenience and disappointment, but Bert's not having it. He wants Sam's house. Choose the remedy for breach of trust that Bert will most likely take. accept compensatory damages demand specific performance initiate rescission settle for liquidated damages 19:19
Eileen Murphy often cared for her elderly neighbor, Thomas Kenney. He paid her $25 per day for her help and once gave her a bank certificate of deposit worth $25,000. She spent the money. Murphy alleged that shortly before his death, Kenney gave her a large block of shares in three corporations. He called his broker, intending to instruct him to transfer the shares to Murphy’s name, but the broker was ill and unavailable. So Kenney told Murphy to write her name on the shares and keep them, which she did. Two weeks later Kenney died. When Murphy presented the shares to Kenney’s broker to transfer ownership to her, the broker refused because Kenney had never endorsed the shares as the law requires, that is, signed them over to Murphy. Was Murphy entitled to the $25,000? To the shares?

SEE MORE QUESTIONS