A) That the car wash was liable to the plaintiff because the car wash accepted responsibility as a bailee.
B) That the car wash was not liable to the plaintiff because the car wash employees had no notice they were taking responsibility for so much jewelry.
C) That the car wash and the plaintiff would be required to split the loss.
D) That the car wash was liable to the plaintiff for the loss because the car wash had not issued a valid disclaimer.
E) That it would be unconscionable to hold the car wash liable for the loss.
G) B) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Warehouse receipt
B) Delivery order
C) Receipt order
D) Negotiable receipt
E) Bill of lading
G) A) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Once delivered a gift may be taken back by the person who gave the gift whereas that is not true when an item is purchased.
B) No consideration is needed for a gift.
C) No written contract is needed for a gift whereas it is needed for a purchase.
D) No certificate of title is needed for a gift whereas it is needed for a purchase.
E) Intent to permanently transfer title is irrelevant when gifts are concerned.
G) C) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Bailment
B) Transfer
C) Loan
D) Release
E) Lease
G) C) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) If a person creates a piece of property for himself or herself, then he or she owns that property only so long as it is registered through either the patent or copyright process.
B) When a person is paid to create property for someone else, the property is owned by the person who paid for its creation.
C) A means of acquiring ownership is by court order.
D) In a bankruptcy case the court may award ownership of certain property to a creditor.
E) A person may acquire ownership through confusion.
G) None of the above
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Invalid
B) Conditional
C) Preventable
D) Temporary
E) Convertible
G) A) and B)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
The three types of documents of title go...View Answer
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
B) False
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) If the ring is valued at $500 or over, then Tina is correct that Becca could not have validly accepted the ring because a writing transferring title would have been needed to validate acceptance.
B) If the ring is valued at $1,000 or over, then Tina is correct that Becca could not have validly accepted the ring because a writing transferring title would have been needed to validate acceptance.
C) Tina is correct that Becca could not have validly accepted the ring because a writing transferring title would have been needed to validate acceptance.
D) Tina is correct that Becca could not have validly accepted the ring when she did not understand its true value.
E) Tina is incorrect, and Becca validly accepted the ring as a gift.
G) None of the above
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) The bailee must at his or her own expense maintain the property.
B) The bailee must take reasonable care of the bailed property.
C) The bailee must use the bailed property only as stipulated in the bailment agreement.
D) The bailee must not alter the bailed property in any unauthorized manner.
E) The bailee must return the bailed property in good condition at the end of the bailment.
G) B) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Appliances
B) Appurtenances
C) Equipment
D) Easements
E) Fixtures
G) C) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Transferor
B) Transferee
C) Novator
D) Bailor
E) Bailee
G) A) and E)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
B) False
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) The court ruled that a gift causa mortis was made because she died before requesting the return of the money and that the money therefore belonged to the son.
B) The court ruled that a gift causa mortis was made because the mother intended that the son keep the money if anything happened to her before or after the trip and that the money therefore belonged to the son.
C) The court ruled that a valid inter vivos gift was made because the mother never requested the return of the money and that the money therefore belonged to the son.
D) The court ruled than a valid inter vivos gift was made because the mother meant for the son to invest the money for her, retaining it if she died, and that the money therefore belonged to the son.
E) The court ruled that neither a valid causa mortis nor a valid inter vivos gift was made and that the funds were properly deducted from any distribution to the son or his heirs.
G) C) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) That a jury question was presented as to whether the negligence of the hotel prevented it from relying on the protection of the Innkeeper Act.
B) That as a matter of law, the plaintiff was entitled to prevail because the negligence of the hotel prevented it from relying on the protection of the Innkeeper Act.
C) That as a matter of law, the plaintiff was entitled to prevail because the Innkeeper Act applies to shield a hotel only from acts of its employees with pass keys, not acts of a non-employee thief.
D) That the Innkeeper Act shielded the hotel from liability because the items could have been deposited in the hotel safe and that the plaintiff was not therefore entitled to recover.
E) That the plaintiff was entitled to recover only ½ of his losses due to the application of the Innkeeper Act and the fact that the items could have been deposited in the hotel safe.
G) A) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
B) False
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) He is correct.
B) He is correct that he has no liability to Karen, but incorrect that only Karen may take legal action against the thief.
C) He is incorrect that he has no liability to Karen, but correct that only Karen may take legal action against the thief.
D) Only if he can identify the thief beyond a reasonable doubt is he correct that he has no further duties to Karen because only Karen has the right to take legal action against the thief at that point.
E) He is incorrect because he has the right to take legal action against the thief, and Donnie's conduct indicates that he has legal liability to Karen.
G) C) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Mislaid
B) Tossed
C) Discarded
D) Abandoned
E) Terminated
G) A) and B)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) Frank's gift was automatically revoked when he recovered, and the lottery ticket and any proceeds are validly his.
B) Although the gift was not automatically revoked on his recovery, Frank has the right to revoke the gift and recover the lottery proceeds.
C) The gift was not automatically revoked on his recovery; and since Frank did not revoke the gift prior to Bubbles cashing the ticket, he has no rights to any funds.
D) Frank has the right to all funds only because Bubbles has a new boyfriend.
E) Frank has no rights because once he gave the tickets to Bubbles, he gave up all his rights to them.
G) C) and D)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
A) The carrier is liable only if ordinary or gross negligence can be proven.
B) The carrier is liable only if gross negligence can be proven.
C) The carrier is liable only if it can be proven that the carrier acted in a reckless manner.
D) The carrier is generally strictly liable for harm to the bailed property.
E) Because of the doctrine of assumption of risk, the carrier is not liable for harm to the bailed property.
G) A) and B)
Correct Answer
verified
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 41 - 60 of 65
Related Exams