Question

A young woman went to her local shoe shop and selected a pair of shoes. She gave the salesperson cash for the shoes. As the salesperson was putting the shoes into a bag, a robber brandishing a gun entered the store, forced the salesperson to put all of the money in the register into the bag with the shoes, and fled with the bag, the money, and the shoes. After the police had come, the young woman asked the salesperson to get her another pair of shoes. He told the young woman that she would have to pay for them again. The young woman refused.
If the young woman sues the shoe shop for another pair of shoes, who will prevail?
A The young woman, because she did not yet have possession of the shoes.
B The young woman, because the purpose of the contract had been made impossible by an unforeseen event.
C The shoe shop, because title to the shoes had already passed to the young woman.
D The shoe shop, because the contract goods had already been identified.

Answer 1

Answer: A The young woman, because she did not yet have possession of the shoes.

Explanation:

It says that "As the salesperson was putting the shoes into a bag." Proof that she never had possession of the shoes.

She also paid for the shoes.