Person S bought a diamond ring from person L for $6990. At the time of purchase she received a guarantee from the firm attesting to the value of diamond, trade in value and style. Then person S went to trade ring for another, while the jewellers valued the ring 3000 and 3500 respectively. The she realized the value of diamond depends on the oral representation of person L’s sales person. To discuss: The decision for recession of the agreement or damages in the sales price amount.

Question

Want to see the full answer?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 11, Problem 18CP

Summary Introduction

Case summary: Person S bought a diamond ring from person L for $6990. At the time of purchase she received a guarantee from the firm attesting to the value of diamond, trade in value and style. Then person S went to trade ring for another, while the jewellers valued the ring 3000 and 3500 respectively. The she realized the value of diamond depends on the oral representation of person L’s sales person.

To discuss: The decision for recession of the agreement or damages in the sales price amount.

Expert Solution & Answer

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution

See solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Barnes accepted Clark’s offer to sell to him a portion of Clark’s coin collection. Clark forgot that his prized $20 gold piece at the time of the offer and acceptance was included in the portion that he offered to sell to Barnes. Clark did not intend to include the gold piece in the sale. Barnes, at the time of inspecting the offered portion of the collection and prior to accepting the offer, saw the gold piece. Is Barnes entitled to the $20 gold piece? Explain

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.…

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.?