Answer:
Shows mistakes that could've been made
Explanation:
Answer: When an agreement in price has been reached
Explanation: The best stage to ask such question is when both Morris and delis supermarket has reached an agreement in price of the new machine. The first stage of discussion is
1. Identification of the machine, if it actually replaces the the old machine and it can perform the same operation as the old one.
2. After identification, the next stage is price negotiation, the price or the machine must reach an agreement before a schedule delivery can be put in place.
I personally think the answer is a
Answer: C In a 100-meter race, two of Amy's co-participants won Silver and Bronze and she performed exceedingly well; it follows that Amy won Gold.
Explanation:
There is a flaw in the evidence presented by the lawyer, several flaws actually:
- The client could have been the culprit and left the main door and garage open as an alibi.
- There is no mention of there being an altercation with a thief that cost the wife her life.
- There is no mention of things being stolen to prove that it was a thief.
The attorney used one logic and deduced a flawed conclusion from it so the option that is similar has to do the same as the above.
Option A is not applicable here as blame was taken by the perpetrator.
Option B is not flawed as one would be expected to be late in such circumstances.
Option C has a flaw because performing exceedingly well is relative. Amy could simply be performing exceedingly well in relation to past races. Amy's co-participants could have performed even better which is why they won medals and while Amy performed exceedingly well by her standards, it was not enough to win a medal.
Option D has no flaw. It is a logical deduction and argument just like option E.
