Answer:
D)fraud
Explanation:
From the question, we are informed about Olive, the owner of Olive’s Orchard, contracts to sell its harvest to Pure Foods, Inc. Later Olive refuses to perform. Pure Foods files a suit to enforce the contract. Olive and Pure Foods are in a state that does not recognize the doctrine of unconscionability. To defend successfully against enforcement of the contract on similar grounds,. In this case, Olive might rely on traditional notions of a fraud. Fraud can be regarded as an act of deception which is intentional to deprive those that fall for it their legal right. It is activities that gives the perpetrator an unlawful gain or to deny a victim their right. It is carried out by people to get financial or personal gain in an unlawful manner. Some types of fraud that are common are are tax fraud, bankruptcy fraud. as well as credit card fraud,
It’s the second one,about not being able to see someone’s work-ethic
Answer:
.b.can agree to a new contract that includes the new price
Explanation:
When Sal and Tasty agreed to cancel their first contract, that was the end of that particular contract. No further negotiations can take place because the contract doe not exist. By calling Tasty the following day, Sal was initiating a new contract.
A new contract does not need to make any references to the canceled contract. Sal and Tasty are free to negotiate for new terms and negotiations since this is a new contract. The details of the canceled contract are no longer binding to them.
Answer: The total of $350,000 will be Maria and Javier's qualified business income.
Explanation:
The amount of guranteed payments, i.e., $500,000 will not be included in the qualified business income. Therefore, their qualified business income is $350,000. Since they are equal partners, we will divide the $350,000 by 2 which will give us $175,000 for each of them.
