Please do not give solution in image formate thanku. Please review the case titled Drake Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Polyflow, Inc. in the textbook and submit a written response summarizing what happened in the case (i.e., a summary of the facts). Be sure to include the following in your summary: Who are the parties in the case? The parties in this case are Defendant, Drake Manufacturing Company, Inc. and Plaintiff, Polyflow. Do you believe that Drake Manufacturing Company, Inc. was doing business in the state for the purpose of being required to qualify to do business?

Please do not give solution in image formate thanku. Please review the case titled Drake Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Polyflow, Inc. in the textbook and submit a written response summarizing what happened in the case (i.e., a summary of the facts). Be sure to include the following in your summary: Who are the parties in the case? The parties in this case are Defendant, Drake Manufacturing Company, Inc. and Plaintiff, Polyflow. Do you believe that Drake Manufacturing Company, Inc. was doing business in the state for the purpose of being required to qualify to do business?

Similar questions

In Brooks v. Lewin Realty III, Inc., the Md Ct App held that for plaintiff to make out a prima facie case, she must show that (select the best answer): O the plaintiff did not cause the violation of the ordinance, that plaintiff did not contribute to the injury, and that the injury was suffered by a contractor trying to repair the walkway to the house if not repaired, a violation of an ordinance may occur, an injury is possible if the condition of the house is not repaired, and that the legislature sought to increase the tax base of the rental house or unit involved Othere is a violation of an ordinance, that the violation proximately caused an injury, and that the injured plaintiff was in a class of people intended to be protected by the ordinance O it was not her fault that the paint in the dwelling was peeling, that the peeling paint was lead paint, and that there was someone who was injured in the past by this landlord
Case Brief for Leonard v PepsiCo
Case: Brandt v. Boston Scientific Corporation and Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center Facts: Brenda Brandt was admitted to Bush Lincoln Health Center for treatment of urinary incontinence. She had a surgical procedure in which a sling was implanted. The manufacturer, Boston Scientific, recalled the item. Brenda had to have the sling surgically removed. She sued the manufacturer and the designer. In this case, Brandt’s bill from the Health Center reflects that of the $11,174.50 total charge for her surgery. $1,659.50, or 14.9%, was for the sling and its surgical kit. What provision of the UCC did the plaintiff sue under? What was the reasoning and decision of the court hearing the case
Search Select the action that f RmQRraQ2xgmK/vEHUtbyUOVMVYZK/COURSE/L8dPKEXIFPokcBjv/question/OkgmLPh4bkpkRpB/TEST COURSE L Select the action that falls within the duties and powers of the Florida Real Estate Commission. establishing a fee for real estate license reinstatement O determining the guilt of a broker who has engaged in theft and ordering an appropriate prison sentence creating a law that title companies must follow in order to streamline the closing process conducting a trial regardiply criminal charges against a licensed sales associate who is accused of assault DES R KEOUL
Why do facts matter when it comes to warranties either implied or expressed?
Can you please help me answer this?
Joe took out a loan to purchase a new house. In return, Joe's lender placed a lien on the property. Is this legal? O No. Only Joe can place a lien his property. O No. A lender is never allowed to place a lien on a property as long as the borrower is up-to-date ontheir payments. О Yes. This is a voluntary mortgage lien that allows the lender to foreclose on the property if Joe defaults on the loan. O Yes. However, the lien is only valid for 12 months.
. In Arora v. Whirlpool Canada LP, 2013 ONCA 657, damages had been claimed for both express and implied warranty. Summarize the Court’s ruling regarding these two issues.
Pls help ASAPon both pls
A local builder offers to place with you insurance on every house he/she builds while it is under construction. In return, he/she wants you to allow him/her 20 % discount off the premium required by insurers. How would you respond to comply with RIBO Regulations? OA) You can only allow a five percent (5%) discount because of your overhead and expenses. OB) You will pay the builder a flat $10.00 fee for each house, but it is contrary to RIBO Regulations to discount the premium. OC) You refuse to pay the builder anything, since it would contravene RIBO Regulations. OD) You offer the builder a 20% premium refund for those houses that have no claims while under construction.
Q1. To prevail in an action brought under common law, the plaintiff must show all of the following except: (in your response, explain the burdens of proof for a third-party plaintiff under common law). Q2. Kerry CPA is the auditor for Sammy Corp. During the audit, Kerry discovers a material misstatement in Sammy's financial statements. Sammy's management tells Kerry that if the misstatement is corrected or if Kerry issues an opinion that indicates there is a material misstatement, Sammy Corp. will likely have to declare bankruptcy and thousands of employees will lose their jobs. Which of the following statements is true if the misstatement is not corrected and Kerry issues an unqualified opinion on Sammy's financial statements? (in your response, identify the court case that makes Kerry liable to any person who suffered a loss as a result of the fraud).
Give an example of a statute at the Federal Level and at the State Level. Give an example of an Administrative Agency at the Federal level. Please list the 3 equitable remedies available to someone in a lawsuit.