Reference no: EM131721624
1. Linda was a guest in the Mardell Hotel. While walking across the hotel lobby, Linda slipped and fell on the wet floor and broke her leg. Linda required surgery to repair the broken leg.
Just prior to Linda’s fall, the hotel floor had been washed by the maintenance staff. The staff had placed a “wet floor” sign on the lobby floor. Linda now wants to collect damages to compensate her for medical expenses for her broken leg.
Is it likely Linda can collect compensatory damages to cover her medical expenses?
No, there was a sign posted warning about the wet floor; Linda assumed the risk by walking across the wet floor.
No, it is reasonable the hotel staff would need to clean the floor and after posting a warning sign, it is not foreseeable that people would walk on the wet floor and fall.
Yes, the hotel had a duty to protect guests from known harm on the premises of the hotel.
Yes, unless the warning sign was large and conspicuous.
2. Eagle, Inc. sells motor vehicle parts to dealers. In response to a dealer’s order, Eagle shipped a crate with a label that read, “Crate contains one 150-horsepower diesel engine.” This statement is:
A. An express warranty.
B. An implied warranty of merchantability.
C. An implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
D. None of the above.
3. In December 2016, Charlotte became the 25th partner with International Enterprises, an existing general partnership with 24 partners. In April 2017, an International Enterprises partnership debt came due in full in the amount of $100,000. The debt was originally incurred in June 2016. Charlotte is:
A. Only liable for the debt up to the amount of her capital contribution to the partnership. B. Not liable for the debt because the debt was incurred prior to her joining the partnership.
C. Liable for her pro-rata one-twenty fifth share of the total debt along with the other partners.
D. Liable for one-twenty fifth of the debt if all the other partners default on the debt ad refuse to pay.
4. A orally offered to sell B 100 electric toothbrushes, but neglected to state the price. B accepted the offer via email and requested delivery within 2 weeks. A received the acceptance email, but immediately thereafter, A tried to get out of the deal. Assume that A and B are both merchants, as defined under the UCC, and have engaged in sales contracts together previously. At this point which of the following is most likely to be true about this agreement between A and B?
A. There is no valid contract because the offer is too indefinite.
B. There is no valid contract because any offer for the sale of goods must be in writing and signed by both parties.
C. There is a valid, enforceable contract.
D. There is a valid, enforceable contract only if either A or B are engaged in international business which makes the agreement subject to CISG (Contract for International Sale of Goods) rules.