Im not 100% sure but i think the answer is B
Answer:
bill of lading
Explanation:
Bill of lading is a legal document issue when goods are transferred from one place to another. It is issued by the freight carrier to the person who is shipping the goods. This document contains details such as which goods are shipped, quantity, details of destination. It also serves the purpose of shipment receipt, once the goods are delivered at mentioned destination in the document. To make sure that requisite goods has been correctly received the destination and shipped correctly from the shipper, the document is signed by authorized person from the receiver, the shipper, and the carrier.
The objective of such document is
- preventing theft of goods.
- Create transparency of transaction.
- Serves as a legal proof in case of any conflict.
Answer:
(During write-off) March 11
Dr Bad debt expense $9,100
Cr Accounts receivable $9,100
(at the time of collection) March 29
Dr Accounts receivable $9,100
Cr Bad debts expense $9,100
Dr Cash $9,100
Cr Accounts receivable $9,100
Explanation:
On March 11, Dexter made an entry to write-off bad debts in the amount of $9,100. Dexter Co., charged it directly to Accounts receivable because the company uses direct write-off method. During the collection we have 2 steps to consider; First, On March 29 during the unexpected collection, Dexter shoud set up the reversal of the write-off entry which they had made last March 11. So we debit Accounts receivable and credit bad debts in the amount of $9,100. Second, is to record the collection, debit cash and credit Accounts receivable in the amount of $9,100.
<span>The error is called a comma split. That is because the two clauses are connected with a comma without a conjunction and this is ungrammatical. You should either turn them into two sentences, or add a conjunction, or turn the comma into a semi-colon. This way you would correct the error.</span>
Answer:
voidable title
Explanation:
A voidable title is considered good and valid title until voided.
For example, I purchase a PS4 from my nephew who is a minor and I sell it to my neighbor, and my neighbor purchased it on good faith. My nephew can decide to void the contract because he was a minor, but since I passed good title to my neighbor while the contract was valid, my neighbor doesn't have to return the PS4.
The difference with a void title is that a void title was never good and valid.
On the other hand, if I had stolen the PS4, I would never have good title over it, and I sell it to my neighbor. The rightful owner of the PS4 can claim it back and my neighbor must return it because the contract was void since I never had good title on the PS4.
