16. Jack went into a store and saw a beautiful leather jacket bearing a price tag of $29. The Jack handed the salesman a $50 bill and said, "I accept. We have a deal." The salesman then noticed the price tag and told the Jack an error had been made and that the price was $229. In this case: a. Jack validly accepted the store's offer. b no contract was formed because Jack's offer was refused. c. the price tag was a firm offer. d. Jack is the offeree. 17. In International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington, International Shoe did not have offices in Washington State but it did send about a dozen sales people there. The Supreme Court held that: a. The case involved a federal question over which the court had jurisdiction b. The Washington Courts had no jurisdiction over International Shoe c. International Shoe did not have sufficient contacts with Washington. International Shoe had sufficient contacts with the state to be sued in Washington. 18. Supplier S sends a written offer to Retailer R for the sale of electronic devices with specific delivery terms. Retailer R responds by accepting the offer but includes additional terms in the acceptance related to warranty coverage, significantly altering the original contract terms. Which legal principle under UCC 2-207 applies to this scenario? a. The conflicting warranty terms are treated as proposals for additional terms and do not become part of the contract. b. There is no contract because the additional terms create a counteroffer and rejection of the offer. c. The additional warranty terms automatically become part of the contract. d. The additional warranty terms are deemed immaterial and do not alter the contract 19. Chandra sues Wendy for making a promise under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. She will have to prove all of the following except: Chandra and Wendy engaged in a bargained-for exchange. b. Wendy must intend or should reasonably expect that Chandra will rely on the promise. c. Chandra must in fact rely on the promise in some definite and substantial manner. d. Enforcement of Wendy's promise is the only way to avoid injustice. 20. All of the following are considered limited or special jurisdiction courts except: a. A Probate court b. A Juvenile court A Court of original jurisdiction. d. A Domestic Relations court

16. Jack went into a store and saw a beautiful leather jacket bearing a price tag of $29. The Jack handed the salesman a $50 bill and said, "I accept. We have a deal." The salesman then noticed the price tag and told the Jack an error had been made and that the price was $229. In this case: a. Jack validly accepted the store's offer. b no contract was formed because Jack's offer was refused. c. the price tag was a firm offer. d. Jack is the offeree. 17. In International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington, International Shoe did not have offices in Washington State but it did send about a dozen sales people there. The Supreme Court held that: a. The case involved a federal question over which the court had jurisdiction b. The Washington Courts had no jurisdiction over International Shoe c. International Shoe did not have sufficient contacts with Washington. International Shoe had sufficient contacts with the state to be sued in Washington. 18. Supplier S sends a written offer to Retailer R for the sale of electronic devices with specific delivery terms. Retailer R responds by accepting the offer but includes additional terms in the acceptance related to warranty coverage, significantly altering the original contract terms. Which legal principle under UCC 2-207 applies to this scenario? a. The conflicting warranty terms are treated as proposals for additional terms and do not become part of the contract. b. There is no contract because the additional terms create a counteroffer and rejection of the offer. c. The additional warranty terms automatically become part of the contract. d. The additional warranty terms are deemed immaterial and do not alter the contract 19. Chandra sues Wendy for making a promise under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. She will have to prove all of the following except: Chandra and Wendy engaged in a bargained-for exchange. b. Wendy must intend or should reasonably expect that Chandra will rely on the promise. c. Chandra must in fact rely on the promise in some definite and substantial manner. d. Enforcement of Wendy's promise is the only way to avoid injustice. 20. All of the following are considered limited or special jurisdiction courts except: a. A Probate court b. A Juvenile court A Court of original jurisdiction. d. A Domestic Relations court

Intermediate Accounting: Reporting And Analysis

3rd Edition

ISBN:9781337788281

Author:James M. Wahlen, Jefferson P. Jones, Donald Pagach

Publisher:James M. Wahlen, Jefferson P. Jones, Donald Pagach

Chapter17: Advanced Issues In Revenue Recognition

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 2E: Consider each of the following scenarios: a. A seller orally agrees with one of its best customers...

See similar textbooks