1) A Question of Ethics: There is often a fine line between puffery and express
Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, At affordable rates
For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now
1) A Question of Ethics: There is often a fine line between puffery and express warranties or puffery and fraudulent misrepresentation. Not all consumers have the knowledge and ability to determine the difference. Cases dealing with these questions have different outcomes depending upon the twelve people sitting in the jury box. After all, the person in sales has to make a living. Where do you stand on using puffery? Briefly discuss. 2. Read the following facts: Moon, a farmer, needs to install a two-thousand-pound piece of equipment in his barn. This will require lifting the equipment thirty fet up into the hayloft. Moon goes to Davidson Hardware and tells Davidson the he needs a heavy-duty rope to be used on his farm. Davidson recommends a one-inch-thick nylon rope, and Moon purchases two hundred feet of it. Moon ties the rope around the piece of equipment; puts the rope through the pulley, and, with a tractor, lifts the equipment off the ground. Suddenly the rope breaks. The equipment crashes to the ground and is severely damaged. Moon files suit against Davidson for breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Discuss why you think Moon will — or will not– be successful in his suit. 3. Regarding Requirements for Negotiability:: Michael borrowed $2,970 from Cindy. Both of their signatures appeared at the bottom of the note. The note stated: “I Michael Smith owe Cindy Jones $2,970 and agree to pay her back in full” Signed on this 26th day of Septermber, 2009. More than a year later Cindy filed suit against Michael to recover on the note. Michael admitted that he had borrowed the funds, but he contended, without proof, that he had paid Cindy in full. Is this note negotiable? Which party is likely to prevail? Why? 4. Rachel fraudulently induces Blind Aunt Sue to sign a note she thought was a birthday card for Cousin Jane. Rachel sells the note to Terry, who does not know of the fraud and takes the note for value and in good faith, and thus becomes an HDC. Terry sells the note to Hal, who sells the note back to Rachel. Does Rachel acquire Terry’s HDC rights in the note?
