Joseph and Mai each bought shares of Apple stock at $200 per share. About a week later, Joseph called his stockbroker and told him that if Apple was trading below $195, he wanted to sell. The broker was very busy, so he didn’t check but Apple was trading at $194 per share. He told Joseph that it was not below $195, so Joseph did not sell the stock. Mai also called her stockbroker that day also and told him that if Apple was trading below $195, she wanted to sell. Once again, the broker was very busy, so he didn’t check but Apple was trading at $194 per share. He told Mai that it was not below $195. However, Mai saw the price on her computer and knew it was $94. However, Mai did not sell either. Apple dropped to $180 per share by the end of the day and they both sold suffering a large loss. They both sue the brokers. What are the probable outcomes of the suits?

Joseph and Mai each bought shares of Apple stock at $200 per share. About a week later, Joseph called his stockbroker and told him that if Apple was trading below $195, he wanted to sell. The broker was very busy, so he didn’t check but Apple was trading at $194 per share. He told Joseph that it was not below $195, so Joseph did not sell the stock. Mai also called her stockbroker that day also and told him that if Apple was trading below $195, she wanted to sell. Once again, the broker was very busy, so he didn’t check but Apple was trading at $194 per share. He told Mai that it was not below $195. However, Mai saw the price on her computer and knew it was $94. However, Mai did not sell either. Apple dropped to $180 per share by the end of the day and they both sold suffering a large loss. They both sue the brokers. What are the probable outcomes of the suits?

Similar questions

A director using confidential information to trade in a company's shares is MOST likely to be in breach of the director's duty:A. to act in the company's best interests.B. to act with care, skill and diligence.C. to exercise powers for a proper purpose.D. to avoid a conflict of interests.
Why does the agent have personal liability when the principal is undisclosed?
David M. Fox was a distributor of tools manufactured and sold by Matco Tools Corporation (Matco). Cox purchased tools from Matco, using a credit line that he repaid as the tools were sold. The credit line was secured by Cox’s Matco tool inventory. In order to expedite payment on Cox’s line of credit, Matco decided to authorize Cox to deposit any customer checks that were made payable to “Matco Tools” or “Matco” into Cox’s own account. Matco’s controller sent Cox’s bank, Pontiac State Bank (Pontiac), a letter stating that Cox was authorized to make such deposits. Several years later, some Matco tools were stolen from Cox’s inventory. The Travelers Indemnity Company (Travelers), which insured Cox against such a loss, sent Cox a settlement check in the amount of $24,960. The check was made payable to “David M. Cox and Matco Tool Co.” Cox indorsed the check and deposited it in his account at Pontiac. Pon-tiac forwarded the check through the banking system for payment by the drawee bank.…
Parker and Phillips incorporated P & P Resorts Inc., a closely held Texas corporation. Parker was president and Phillips served as vice president and director for operations. Parker owned 40% of the stock, while Phillips owned 60%. Both men met with CTA, a group of travel agents from California to discuss special deals for booking groups into the resorts. After the first meeting, all contracts with CTA were made by Phillips, who learned that there was a good chance that CTA would award the contract to P&P Resorts. Phillips incorporated Travel Brokers and was its sole owner. Phillips used P& P Resort’s time to work on proposals for Travel Brokers and managed to keep negotiations with CTA a secret from Parker. When Parker discovered Phillip’s actions, he filed suit against him for wrongfully taking a corporate opportunity from P &P Resorts. Phillips claimed that he did not take a corporate opportunity because Travel Brokers did not have the financial ability to…
Martha sells goods to James for $25,000. Martha assigns her right to receive the $25,000 to XYZ Finance James refuses to pay XYZ the $25,000. James makes two arguments for not paying. First James claims that XYZ has no privity of contract and that XYZ is not a third-party beneficiary of its contract with Martha. Second – James claims that the goods were worthless. Assume that the goods were worthless. You are the judge. Who wins and why? Address both arguments that James makes.
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.
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…
Fiona, Celine and Donna have recently commenced a business together making custard pies using the name 'FCD's Custard Pies' as their trading name. They also sell coffee and soft drinks. Only Donna has put capital into the business, and no formal agreement exists between them. However, on many occasions Fiona has purchased stock for the business from their various suppliers by using her own money, and she has also set up an account with the suppliers in the name of 'FCD's Custard Pies'. Celine also has often placed orders on behalf of the business with their various suppliers for stock. 00:0 At their next meeting Fiona suggests selling alcoholic beverages. Donna likes the idea, but Celine does not. Celine says that such a change would require renovation of the shop, and also obtaining a licence to sell alcohol. This requires an application to the relevant government authority, which may reject the application. After giving it lots of thought, Donna decides to leave the business in two…
On April 1, Orizon LLC sent Jim Stevens a letter via overnight delivery, offering to employ him to audit Orizon, LLC’s financial statements for the current year for $10,000. In the letter, Orizon, LLC stated that Jim had ten days to accept. On April 5, Jim sent Orizon, LLC a fax that stated, "The price for the audit seems too low. Would you consider paying $12,000?" Orizon, LLC received the fax. The next day, Serena Williams heard about the offer to Jim and said to Orizon, LLC, “I will accept that offer!” On learning of Serena’s statement, Jim immediately e-mailed Orizon, LLC agreeing to do the work for $10,000. Orizon, LLC received this e-mail on April 7. 1. Explain in detail why Orizon, LLC and Jim do, or do not, have a contract. 2. If you did not discuss it already, would applying the mailbox rule change your answer in #1? 3. Can Serena accept this offer?
American Business Financial Services, Inc. (ABFI), a Pennsylvania firm, sells and services loans to businesses and consumers. First Union National Bank, with its principal place of business in North Carolina, provides banking services. Alan Boyer, an employee of First Union, lives in North Carolina and has never been to Pennsylvania. In the course of his employment, Boyer learned that the bank was going to extend a $150 million line of credit to ABFI. Boyer then attempted to manipulate the stock price of ABFI for personal gain by sending disparaging e-mails to ABFI’s independent auditors in Pennsylvania. Boyer also posted negative statements about ABFI and its management on a Yahoo bulletin board. ABFI filed a suit in a Pennsylvania state court against Boyer, First Union, and others, alleging wrongful interference with a contractual relationship, among other things. Boyer filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. Could the court exercise jurisdiction…
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.?
1. Assuming the Accused K was prosecuted for violation of Anti-Bouncing Checks Law, what defense under the law may she offer to escape criminal liability? A. No written notice of dishonor of the check was received by the drawer or maker from the drawee bank, the holder of the check, or the offended party. B. The check in issue is merely a memorandum check. C. The person whose signature appears on the check is merely an employee of a corporation, induced by her employer to countersign the check in blank, without knowing the name of the payee. D. The drawer, within 5 banking days from receipt of the notice of dishonor, tried to make arrangements for the partial payment of the check granted limited funds with the payee refusing to accede to such scenario. 2. K, an employee of a growing BPO earns a salary which is just a bit more than what he needs for a comfortable living. He maintains a P10,000 savings account, a P20,000 checking account, a P30,000 money market…