Smith and Roberson’s Business Law
17th Edition
ISBN: 9781337094757
Author: Richard A. Mann, Barry S. Roberts
Publisher: Cengage Learning
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 3, Problem 1TS
Summary Introduction
Case summary:
Person J suffered personal injuries with a tire manufactured by Company U. His father purchased the automobile from a dealer in State I. The tire was sold in Country B to Company G and subsequently installed on Company O when it was assembled in Company G plant in Country B.
Company O delivered automobiles to State I during those years ranging from 3,235 to 6,630. Person C brought suit in State I against Company U to recover for damages for his personal injuries. Company U declared that, the case was not subjected to jurisdiction of State I courts because the company was not registered to do business in that state and it never had an agent and it never sold or shipped products into State I.
To discuss: The arguments that Person J could make for support of his claim that State I courts have the jurisdiction over Company U.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Deborah McCullough bought a new car from Bill Swad Chrysler, Inc. The car was protected by both a limited warranty and an extended warranty. McCullough immediately encountered problems with the automobile’s brakes, transmission, and air conditioning and discovered a number of cosmetic defects as well. She returned the car to Swad for repairs, but Swad did not fix the brakes properly or perform any of the cosmetic work. Moreover, new problems appeared with respect to the car’s steering mechanism. McCullough returned the car twice more for repairs, but on each occasion, old problems persisted and new ones emerged. After the engine abruptly shut off on a short trip away from home and the brakes again failed on a more extensive excursion, McCullough presented Swad with a list of thirty-two of the car’s defects and demanded their correction. When Swad failed to remedy more than a few of the problems, McCullough wrote a letter to Swad calling for rescission of the purchase agreement and a…
Kate owned a small grocery store. One day John went to the store and purchased a can of chip dip that was, unknown to Kate or John, adulterated. John became seriously ill after eating the dip and sued Kate for damages on the grounds that she breached an implied warranty of merchantability. Is Kate liable? Why?
On March 17, Peckham bought a new car from Larsen Chevrolet for $16,400. During the first one and one-half months after the purchase, Peckham discovered that the car’s hood was dented, its gas tank contained no baffles, its emergency brake was inoperable, the car did not have a jack or a spare tire, and neither the clock nor the speedometer worked. Larsen claimed that Peckham knew of the defects at the time of the purchase. Peckham, on the other hand, claimed that he did not know the extent of the defects and that despite his repeated efforts the defects were not repaired until June 11. Then, on July 15, the car’s dashboard caught fire, leaving the car’s interior damaged and the car itself inoperable. Peckham then returned to Larsen Chevrolet and told Larsen that he had to repair the car at his own expense or that he, Peckham, would either rescind the contract or demand a new automobile. Peckham also claimed that at the end of their conversation he notified Larsen Chevrolet that he was…
Chapter 3 Solutions
Smith and Roberson’s Business Law
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Bob went out with his friends to celebrate his birthday. They went to a bar where they drank copious quantities of alcohol. In the morning, Bob had not slept and was still obviously intoxicated. He found his way to a car dealership near his house and entered into a contract to buy a Mercedes Benz SUV for the cost of $140,000.00. The car salesman could smell alcohol on Bob's breath, he noticed his eyes were bloodshot and "glossy" while they were signing the papers relating to the sale, and when Bob left he could see that he was unsteady on his feet. Bob left the dealership and went home and went to bed. He slept for two days. The car salesman from the dealership called Bob 4 days later to tell him that his vehicle was ready for pick up. Bob had no memory of the buying any car. In these circumstances:A. the contract is void ab initio because Bob lacked capacity to contract due to his intoxicationB. Bob can avoid or repudiate the contract within a reasonable time after he regains capacity…arrow_forwardPlease do not give solution in image formate thanku. Catherine Creteau and her husband contracted with a travel agency, Liberty Travel, to arrange a trip to Jamaica.While staying in Jamaica in accommodations arranged by Liberty Travel, they were robbed at gunpoint. The Creteaus alleged that Liberty Travel either knew of safety issues with the accommodations or such information was available to Liberty Travel. What duty did the Creteaus allege their agent had breached?arrow_forwardRobert sold used cars, but he had little or no knowledge with respect to the technical aspects of any of the vehicles that he sold. Ray was seeking to buy a Honda Civic and Robert gave his opinion as to the speed of the car and its durability. Ray subsequently finalized the purchase and took control of the car. Two weeks after the purchase, the Honda Civic broke down and required extensive mechanical repairs. Ray is angry and is of the view that Robert misrepresented the condition of the car when he sold it. Ray is of the opinion that as a Used Car Salesmen, Robert should have known that the car was indeed in poor mechanical condition. Please advise Ray using the IRAC methodarrow_forward
- Robert sold used cars, but he had little or no knowledge with respect to the technical aspects of any of the vehicles that he sold. Ray was seeking to buy a Honda Civic and Robert gave his opinion as to the speed of the car and its durability. Ray subsequently finalized the purchase and took control of the car. Two weeks after the purchase, the Honda Civic broke down and required extensive mechanical repairs. Ray is angry and is of the view that Robert misrepresented the condition of the car when he sold it. Ray is of the opinion that as a Used Car Salesmen, Robert should have known that the car was indeed in poor mechanical condition. Ray knows that you are studying Business, and sought your advice on the matter. Please advise Ray.arrow_forwardJoseph Eugene Dodson, age sixteen, purchased a used pickup truck from Burns and Mary Shrader. The Shraders owned and operated Shrader’s Auto Sales. Dodson paid $14,900 in cash for the truck. At the time of sale, the Shraders did not question Dodson’s age, but thought he was eighteen or nineteen. Dodson made no misrepresentation concerning his age. Nine months after the date of purchase, the truck began to develop mechanical problems. A mechanic diagnosed the problem as a burnt valve but could not be certain. Dodson, who could not afford the repairs, continued to drive the truck until one month later, when the engine “blew up.” Dodson parked the vehicle in the front yard of his parents’ home and contacted the Shraders to rescind the purchase of the truck and to request a full refund. a. What arguments would support Dodson’s termination of the contract? b. What arguments would support Shrader’s position that the contract is not voidable? c. Which side should prevail? Explain.arrow_forwardPauline Brown was shot and seriously injured by an unknown assailant in the parking lot of National Supermarkets. Pauline and George Brown brought a negligence action against National, Sentry Security Agency, and T. G. Watkins, a security guard and Sentry employee. Sentry had a security contract with National. The Browns maintained that the defendants have a legal duty to protect National’s customers both in the store and in the parking lot, and that this duty was breached. The defendants denied this allegation. What will the Browns have to prove to prevail? Explain.arrow_forward
- Columbia University brought suit against Jacobsen on two notes signed by him and his parents. The notes represented the balance of tuition he owed the University. Jacobsen counterclaimed for money damages due to Columbia’s deceit or fraudulent misrepresentation. Jacobsen argues that Columbia fraudulently misrepresented that it would teach wisdom, truth, character, enlightenment, and similar virtues and qualities. He specifically cites as support the Columbia motto: “in lumine tuo videbimus lumen” (“In your light we shall see light”); the inscription over the college chapel: “Wisdom dwelleth in the heart of him that hath understanding”; and various excerpts from its brochures, catalogues, and a convocation address made by the University’s president. Jacobsen, a senior who was not graduated because of poor scholastic standing, claims that the University’s failure to meet its promises made through these quotations constituted fraudulent misrepresentation or deceit. Decision?arrow_forwardA received from X a pendant with diamonds valued at P400,500 to be sold on commission basis or to be returned on demand. In the evening of February 1, 2020, while walking home to her residence, two men snatched her purse containing the pendant and ran away. Subsequently, the snatchers were apprehended and charged. During the pendency of the criminal case, X brought an action against A for recovery of the pendant or of its value and damages. The latter interposed the defense of fortuitous event, but the former contends: (a) that the defense of fortuitous event is untenable because there was negligence on the part of the defendant; and (b) that if the defense is tenable, nevertheless, there must be a prior conviction for robbery before it can be availed of. Decide the case.arrow_forwardAs part of its business, Kinko’s Graphics Corporation (Kinko’s) copied excerpts from books, compiled them in “packets,” and sold the packets to college students. Kinko’s did this without permission from the owners of the copyrights to the books and without paying copyright fees or royalties. Kinko’s has more than two hundred stores nationwide and reported $15 million in assets and $3 million in profits for 1989. Basic Books, Harper & Row, John Wiley & Sons, and others (plaintiffs) sued Kinko’s for violation of the Copyright Act of 1976. Plaintiffs owned copyrights to the works copied and sold by Kinko’s and derived substantial income from royalties. They argued that Kinko’s had infringed on their copyrights by copying excerpts from their books and selling the copies to college students for profit. Kinko’s admitted that it had copied excerpts without permission and had sold them in packets to students, but it contended that its actions constituted a fair use of the works in…arrow_forward
- X bound himself it to deliver to Y a 21 inch 2010 model TV sets, and the 13 cubic feet gray samsung refrigerator, with motor no. SAM-123 which Y saw in X's store, and to repair Y's piano, X did none of these things May the court compel X to deliver the Tv set and the refrigerator and repair the piano? Why? If not, what relief may the court grant Y? Why?arrow_forwardDorton, as a representative for The Carpet Mart, purchased carpets from Collins & Aikman that were supposedly manufactured of 100 percent Kodel polyester fiber but were, in fact, made of cheaper and inferior fibers. Dorton then brought suit for compensatory and punitive damages against Collins & Aikman for its fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation in the sale of the carpets. Collins & Aikman moved for a stay pending arbitration, claiming that Dorton was bound to an arbitration agreement printed on the reverse side of Collins & Aikman’s printed sales acknowledgment form. A provision printed on the face of the acknowledgment form stated that its acceptance was “subject to all of the terms and conditions on the face and reverse side thereof, including arbitration, all of which are accepted by buyer.” Is the arbitration clause enforceable? Why or why not?arrow_forwardPattie purchases a couch from Good Stuff, Inc., to use in her home. She pays for the couch, and Good Stuff agrees to deliver it. Unfortunately, on the way to her house, the delivery truck overheats and burns, destroying the truck and the couch inside. Pattie asks for a refund or another couch. Good Stuff’s owner refuses. If Pattie decides to sue Good Stuff, which party is likely to prevail? Explain. (In your answer, be sure to identify and discuss which law(s) might apply and how that could affect the outcome.)arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Understanding BusinessManagementISBN:9781259929434Author:William NickelsPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
Management (14th Edition)ManagementISBN:9780134527604Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. CoulterPublisher:PEARSON
Spreadsheet Modeling & Decision Analysis: A Pract...ManagementISBN:9781305947412Author:Cliff RagsdalePublisher:Cengage Learning
Management Information Systems: Managing The Digi...ManagementISBN:9780135191798Author:Kenneth C. Laudon, Jane P. LaudonPublisher:PEARSON
Business Essentials (12th Edition) (What's New in...ManagementISBN:9780134728391Author:Ronald J. Ebert, Ricky W. GriffinPublisher:PEARSON
Fundamentals of Management (10th Edition)ManagementISBN:9780134237473Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter, David A. De CenzoPublisher:PEARSON
Understanding Business
Management
ISBN:9781259929434
Author:William Nickels
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education
Management (14th Edition)
Management
ISBN:9780134527604
Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter
Publisher:PEARSON
Spreadsheet Modeling & Decision Analysis: A Pract...
Management
ISBN:9781305947412
Author:Cliff Ragsdale
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Management Information Systems: Managing The Digi...
Management
ISBN:9780135191798
Author:Kenneth C. Laudon, Jane P. Laudon
Publisher:PEARSON
Business Essentials (12th Edition) (What's New in...
Management
ISBN:9780134728391
Author:Ronald J. Ebert, Ricky W. Griffin
Publisher:PEARSON
Fundamentals of Management (10th Edition)
Management
ISBN:9780134237473
Author:Stephen P. Robbins, Mary A. Coulter, David A. De Cenzo
Publisher:PEARSON