Answer:
$6,000
Explanation:
Since it is stated in the question that "Typically, the credit card bill is paid in full in the following month", it implies that cash will be disbursed in October for purchases of goods made in September, while cash will be disbursed in November for purchases of goods made in October.
Based on this, Lambert's expected cash disbursement in October for purchases of goods made in September is $6,000, while his expected cash disbursement in November for purchases of goods (a new computer) made in October is $4,500.
Answer:
The answer is: C) lose because he will not be able to prove reliance on the misrepresentation.
Explanation:
In order for Larson to be able to rescind the contract, he would have to prove that he had reasonable reliance that Robert Redford owned that specific car. Reasonable reliance refers to a person believing something to be a fact, which any other person could reasonably believe in as well.
But exactly how could he prove that someone else might also believe that the car was previously owned by Robert Redford? I find it very doubtful that he can prove that.
Hello There!
Your answer would be <u>C). A tortious act may also be a criminal act.</u>
The reason why C would be your answer is because a tortious act is something that harms someone in any way. The reason why it "may" be a criminal act is because determine if the tortious act is a criminal act really depends on the scenario that is occurring. For example, someone could cause a tortious act in a way of self defense, this scenario would be debatable because the person that committed the tortious act had a valid reason in doing so, and that was protecting themselves. But, if a person was to cause a tortious act by hurting someone to steal from them, then that would definitely be a criminal act because they are performing dangerous things to someone else, and the person could file a lawsuit against it.
Let's dive into why the other answer choices are incorrect. We can use the old fashion process of elimination:
Answer choice "A). A tortious act is always a criminal act" is incorrect because it is not always a criminal act, it depends on the scenario it's in. This is the reason why this answer choice would be eliminated.
Answer choice "B). A criminal act is always a tortious act" is incorrect because there are MANY criminal acts that doesn't harm anyone, for example, tax evasion (not paying taxes) is a criminal act, but does not cause any harm to anyone. This is the reason why this answer choice would be eliminated.
Answer choice "D). A tortious act is the same as a contract dispute" is incorrect because harming someone is not the same as not doing what a contract says. A contact dispute is when someone that's part of a contract did not do a duty that the contract says that they're suppose to do, and that usually doesn't have to be any harm to anyone. That would not be the same as a tortious act, harming someone. This is the reason why this answer choice would be eliminated.
Answer:
had a wide application into field of science and technology.
