This problem has been solved!

Business

1 answer:

podryga [215]4 years ago

6 0

Answer:

Option (D) Graham is not allowed to sue Alice, having lost his right to sue her.

Explanation:

The reason is that the plaintiff can only sue the party who damage him / her in a limited period of time. Because the longer the period has lapsed the greater are the chances that the court would think that the plaintiff has forgiven the other party. So once you have forgiven the other party you have no right to sue the company again. The statute of limitations establishes the period in which the case by the plaintiff must be filed against the defendant. So we can see that Graham is unable to sue Alice because the time of suing Alice is passed. It has been 4 years now, Graham has no right to sue Alice now.

You might be interested in

Which of the following is a rule of thumb for cell phone or smartphone etiquette?

Makovka662 [10]

I would have to say D. all of the above

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Refer to Scenario 5.3. On Eaton's website, the firm segments its product offerings as aerospace, filtration, hybrid power, elect

just olya [345]

Answer:

C. product use

Explanation:

Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that in this scenario Eaton most likely adopted a product use segmentation strategy. This strategy basically focuses on finding the selling the same products but in different variations for different uses in many markets. Which is what Eaton's website seems to be doing by offering the same product to different markets such as aerospace, hydraulics, and electrical.

3 0

4 years ago

Disposable income is the money paid to creditors after paying necessities <br> a. True <br> b. False

Gekata [30.6K]

Disposable income is the remaining amount after the deduction of taxes and social security charges etc... you can then spend this money however you want. So the answer is A.
Hope this helps.

7 0

4 years ago

Suppose Hubert and Kate form a cartel and behave as a monopolist. The profit-maximizing price is $ per gallon, and the total out

ArbitrLikvidat [17]

Consider a town in which only two residents, Hubert and Kate, own wells that produce water safe for drinking. Hubert and Kate can pump and sell as much water as they want at no cost. For them, total revenue equals profit.

The following table shows the town's demand schedule for water,

Quantity Demanded Total Revenue (Dollars per gallon) (Gallons of water) (Dollars) $247.50 $450.00 $607.50 4.00 180 $720.00 $787.50 3.00 270 $810.00 $787.50 2.00 $720.00 $607.50 $450.00 $247.50 (Look at attached image for clearer image)

Answer:

$3, $810

Explanation:

By carefully examining the table above we can infer that Hubert and Kate's profit is maximised at $3 unit price.

The total output at this point is 270 with a total Revenue of $810, implying that they will share the amount equally 810/2= $405 for Kate and $405 for Hubert.

4 0

3 years ago

If the annual real interest rate on a 10-year inflation-protected bond equals 1.5 percent and the annual nominal rate of return

Rudik [331]

Because this is easy

6 0

3 years ago