Answer:
The answer is C The difference between the value of the camera accepted and its value if it had been as warranted, medical costs for treating the grandfather's burns, and the cost to replace the grandfathers coat.
Explanation:
(C)When a buyer accepts goods that turn out to be defective, he may recover as damages any "loss resulting in the normal course of events from the breach," which includes the difference between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, plus incidental and consequential damages. Incidental damages resulting from the seller's breach include expenses reasonably incurred in inspection, receipt, and transportation, care, and custody of goods rightfully rejected. In this case, the grandfather incurred no incidental damages. Consequential damages resulting from the seller's breach include any loss resulting from general or particular requirements and needs of which the seller at the time of contracting had reason to know and which could not reasonably be prevented by cover or otherwise, and injury to person or property proximately resulting from any breach of warranty. Here, the grandfather is entitled to breach of warranty damages for the loss of the camera—the difference between the value of the camera accepted and its value if it had been as warranted—plus damages for injury to his person (e.g., medical costs for treating the grandfather's burns) and property (i.e., the cost to replace his coat) because they were proximately caused from the breach of warranty. Thus, (C) is correct, and (A) and (B) are wrong. (D) is wrong because the cost of hiring the professional photographer was not foreseeable. The seller was not told of any particular requirements and needs of the grandfather at the time of contracting nor would the seller have reason to know that the grandfather planned to use the camera to take pictures of his grandson's graduation and would hire a professional photographer if he lost the use of the camera.
Answer:
Cost recovered from driver = $49500
Explanation:
Since the owner suffered $10000 damage
The passenger suffered$100000 damage
Jury determined that driver should carry 45% of the damages
So therefore;
Total cost of damages = 100000 + 10000 = $ 110000
Cost of damage injured by driver = (45/100) * $110000 = $49500
the rise of political parties
Answer:
Entrepreneurs create something new that serves a change
