Kayla, a property owner, loses an acre of her land to adverse possession. She is surprised this was even possible. You explain to her that, even though she owns the property, property can be lost even without the owner's consent through: involuntary alienation voluntary alienation private grants land trust

Kayla, a property owner, loses an acre of her land to adverse possession. She is surprised this was even possible. You explain to her that, even though she owns the property, property can be lost even without the owner's consent through: involuntary alienation voluntary alienation private grants land trust

Understanding Business

12th Edition

ISBN:9781259929434

Author:William Nickels

Publisher:William Nickels

Chapter1: Taking Risks And Making Profits Within The Dynamic Business Environment

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1CE

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Ravi wanted to buy a property owned my Ramesh, Ravi invited Ramesh to his home to discuss the further course of action. During the discussion Ravi threatens to him to sell that property at a very low price. Under the threat of life Ramesh signs the agreement.Ramesh comes to you to check how the legal framework will help him to over comewith this situation and loss-making deal.
Please assist
Explore the fundamental entitlements granted to a bailor within the context of a bailment agreement.
under the NCC, what are the different acts or omissions of the obligor or debtor which will result in the breach of the obligation for which he can be held liable for damages?
Discuss how a misrepresentation - be it innocent, negligent or fraudulent - is treated under tort law vs. contract law.
You are President and CEO of Apex Business Systems, Inc. (Apex). Apex, through its purchasing agent, bought a new microwave from Inki Appliances Company (Inki) who sells microwaves on a daily basis. There was no written or oral warranty given when the sale was made. The microwave stopped working one week after it was placed it in the company kitchen. Assume also that nobody misused the microwave or in any way caused it to quit working. The purchasing agent returned the microwave three days after it quit working. The owner of Inki refused to repair or replace the microwave or offer a refund. Prepare a demand letter to be sent to Inki.
Arif is 75 years old and managed to accumulate an estate of more than $2 million, including a house valued at $700,000 and investment assets worth $1.3 million. Arif's wife died 2 years ago. His two children and Arif's new girlfriend believe they will inherit the estate assets. When Arif was in the hospital, he spoke his last words by giving instructions as to how to distribute his estate. Unfortunately, Arif did not have a valid Will at his death. Which of the following statements is true? 1. The estate assets will be distributed according to the intestacy provisions of the province in which Arif lived. II. Arif did not die intestate. III. Arif's last words in the hospital can be considered as a letter of last instruction. IV. Arif's estate will be distributed based on preferential share. Select one: O a. I, II, and IV O b. I, III, and IV O c. I and II
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…
Betty went to the cinema to watch the premiere of Hulk Mister. She bought the ticket and went into the cinema. As she sat down on the chair, the legs of the chair broke and she fell onto the ground injuring her lower back. It turned out that the chair was previously broken and has not been properly repaired by the staff of the cinema. She was hospitalised for a month and could not work during the time she was in the hospital. Required: Betty wants to start legal proceedings to claim damages from the cinema for the injury. Advise her of the legal grounds on which she can claim compensation from the cinema and discuss, with reference to relevant legal principles and cases, the necessary steps that Betty needs to go through in order to prove her case.
How does the concept of constructive bailment arise and what are its implications in legal cases?
What is the main difference between contracts discharged due to operation of law and contracts discharged due to acts of the parties? Discharge due to acts of the parties never requires court intervention, whereas discharge due to operation of law always does. Discharge due to operation of law reflects at least one party's intent, whereas discharge due to acts of the parties doesn't necessarily reflect either party's intent. Discharge due to acts of the parties is legally binding, whereas discharge due to operation of law is not. Discharge due to operation of law doesn't necessarily reflect either party's intent, whereas discharge due to acts of the parties reflects at least one party's intent. 11 XIR Submit > 17