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.

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.

Similar questions

Joshua borrowed from Gerald an amount of P20,000 in money. Joshua ORALLY promised to pay it within 7 months and when he tries to pay it on the 8th month, Gerald demanded the payment of interest of 12% per annum because of Joshua’s delay in payment. Joshua paid his debt and the interest claimed by Gerald. After rethinking, Joshua demanded back from Gerald the amount he paid as interest. Gerald claims he has no obligation to return the interest paid by Joshua because it was a natural obligation which Joshua voluntarily performed and can no longer recover. Based on the problem given answer the following: a. Is the contention of Gerald correct? Why or why not? b. Can Joshua recover the interest he paid? Why or why not? c. Who is the obligor d. Who is the obligee e. What is the prestation f. What is the vinculum juris g. Distinguish Civil obligation vis-à-vis Natural Obligation.
Explain the difference between a docketing fee and a cancellation fee of an arbitrator.
Why does the agent have personal liability when the principal is undisclosed?
A8
The following are exceptions to the general rule that only persons who sign the negotiable instrument are liable thereon, except: a. Agent who fails to disclose his principal b. Written promise to accept a bill before it is drawn c. Acceptance of a bill on a separate paper d. Persons signing under a trade name
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?
Explain Subcontracting?
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.…
After researching Best Buy common stock, Sally Wang is convinced the stock is overpriced. She contacts her account executive and arranges to sell short 550 shares of Best Buy. At the time of the sale, a share of common stock had a value of $148. Three months later, Best Buy is selling for $140 a share, and Sally instructs her broker to cover her short transaction. Total commissions to buy and sell the stock were $58. What is her profit for this short transaction?
Arlene, a minor, buys a stereo from Savannah and signs a promissory note in the amount of $500 payable to Savannah within six months to cover the cost of the stereo. Savannah indorses the promissory note and transfers it to Alvin as payment for Alvin painting Savannah's house. When Alvin tries to collect the note from Arlene at the end of the six months, if Arlene refuses to pay: Alvin will be successful in collecting the payment because he is a holder in due course. Alvin will be successful because he is not a holder in due course. Alvin will be unsuccessful in collecting the payment even though he is a holder in due course.
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.
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.?