Answer:
Instructios are listed below.
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Hubbard Kennel uses tenant-days as its measure of activity; an animal housed in the kennel for one day is counted as one tenant-day. During January, the kennel budgeted for 2,100 tenant-days, but its actual level of activity was 2,060 tenant-days.
Wages and salaries:
Fixed= $ 2,300
Variable= $ 7.20
Estimated Wages and Salaries= 2,300 + 7.2*2,100= $17,420
Answer:
The correct answer is letter "A": cumulative preferred stock that have been declared but have not been paid.
Explanation:
Dividends in arrears are dividends that have not been paid in a period on cumulative preferred stock. A company does not necessarily have to pay dividends to its shareholders but the payment becomes cumulative. Under this situation, it is said that the organization has failed to generate enough cash during the year. Besides, there must be a dividend declaration for the dividends in arrears to be liable recognized.
Answer:
Franco will Lose if he sues as this was an accident.
Explanation:
This question tells us that the city of Kyle and the company wonderworks, had taken all reasonable precautions regarding safety while handling and launching the fireworks. So this is not a case of negligence neither is it a case of a breach of duty. So this case is going to be ruled as an accident if Franco should sue. Which is actually what it is.
Answer:
The increase in operating profit is $1,829.00.
Explanation:
The rise or fall in the operating income:
= Purchase unit × ( offer price- direct material- direct labor- variable overhead)
The rise or fall in the operating income: = 1550× (2 - 0.26 - 0.4 - 0.16)
The rise or fall in the operating income: = $1829
Therefore the profit will increase by $1829
Here all the fixed cost is not considered because it is a sunk cost and variable and administrative expenses are also not considered because these costs are not going to be incurred for offer.
The cengage learning for the mitigation is the difference between the agreed upon $72000 less what was earned from the $25000 position that barton managed to obtain
<u>Explanation</u>:
Mitigation of damages:
In the case of barton v. vanhorn a court would consider barton's attempts at findings similar employment a reasonable step in mitigating her damages.
Under the doctrine of damage mitigation, a wrongfully terminated employee must look for other compartable employment, and subtract whatever you make from that job from what you request in damages.
Damages in the case would be the difference between the agreed upon $72000 less what was earned from the $25000 position that barton managed to obtain.
