The order is infraction being the least serious, misdemeanor, and then felony.
Answer:
The court ruled against both Americar and Regency Inn, and then Regency Inn won its case against Americar. The nuisance case itself is pretty unpleasant, so it's not worth referring to it.
The fundamentals for the ruling against Americar were that they themselves had drafted the lease agreement and that the clause included in the lease agreement by which they agreed to indemnify Regency Inn was valid. The original lease term had already expired, but Americar continued to lease the offices on a monthly basis. Since they never left the place, the clauses in the original agreement were still valid even though the lease changed to a monthly basis. I.e. if you sign a lease contract and after the original contract is over, you continue to lease the same place, then the clauses from the original contract still apply.
The clause stated that Americar was liable for damages that took place on the leased premises or in their proximity, i.e. the area near their offices. The parking lot was considered to be in the proximity of Americar's offices.
Answer:
Financial disadvantage from further processing = $(9)
Explanation:
<em>A company should process further a product if the additional revenue from the split-off point is greater than than the further processing cost. </em>
<em>Also note that all cost incurred up to the split-off point (the cost of crushing) are irrelevant to the decision to process further . </em>
$
Sales revenue after crushing 55
Sales revenue at the split-off point <u>81</u>
Additional sales revenue 26
Further processing cost <u> (35)</u>
Net income after further processing <u> (9)
</u>
Financial disadvantage from further processing = $(9)
<em>Kindly note that the allocated joint costs( cost of sugar and crushing) are irrelevant. This implies that whether or not the intermediate products are processed further the joint costs are irrelevant to the decision to process the beet juice further</em>.
Answer:
Bad debt expense $11,320 ($283,000 × 4%)
To Allowance for doubtful debts $11,320
(being the bad debt expense is recorded)
Explanation:
The journal entry is shown below:
Bad debt expense $11,320 ($283,000 × 4%)
To Allowance for doubtful debts $11,320
(being the bad debt expense is recorded)
For recording this given transaction, we debited the bad debt expense as it increases the expenses account and at the same time it decreases the account receivable so the allowance would be credited so that the proper posting could be done
<span>a) If energy prices go up, manufacturing costs go up, which ultimately increases the price of the notebook. This will also most likely lead to a decrease in quantity, as the manufacturing cost per unit is higher. This is a supply determinant.
b) In theory, the subsidy reduces the cost per unit to the manufacturer, which increases supply and often reduces price, again being a supply-side determinant. In reality, it creates an incentive for notebook manufacturers to keep doing what they are doing, disincentivizing cost-saving developments and alternatives. Why innovate when you can get free government cheese?
Anyway, supply determinant.
c) The price of an inferior good increasing tends to push some demand for superior goods, especially when the income to cost of good ratio remains the same for the inferior good but gets better for the superior one. Demand determinant. </span>
