an apprenticeship with another data systems analyst
Answer:
<em>Ratification by Principal One of the criteria for enactment is that all material truths involved in the transaction must be known to the Principal. Van Stavern was not aware of Hash's behaviour. </em>
He did not realize that somehow the steel is being shipped under his name, and that the shipments were being billed him directly. Unlike liability through obvious authority, approval by the principal is a positive act by which he or she acknowledges the agent's illegal actions.
Just a principal would ratify; thus, Van Stavern was not directly imputed to information by the invoices and checks signed by Van Stavern's workers.
The court stated that the use of corporate checks was further proof that Van Stavern regarded the expenditures as business, not private. So Van Stavern could not be held personally liable.
Remember that on Sutton Steel that's not excessively harsh. Sutton understood it was working with a building company and did not seek to get the personal approval of the contract from Van Stavern.
<em>Lawfully, Sutton's agreement in this case is called an unaccepted offer which can be withdrawn at any time.</em>
<em></em>
Answer:
Answer is $15,000
$6,000 share of ordinary income plus $9,000 gain for a $50,000 distribution in excess of her $41,000 stock basis.
Answer:
The correct answer is $780.
Explanation:
As per the data given in the question,
Markup percentage = 30%
Total cost = $270 + $135 + $90 +$105
= $600
We can calculate the price by using following formula:
Price = Total cost + (Total cost × markup %)
by putting the value, we get
Price = $600 + ( $600 × 30% )
= $600 + $180
= $780.
Hence, the price that company charge will be $780.
