Quizzes & Puzzles86 mins ago
Who do you think is the winner?
Robert McClure owned a vehicle salvage and rebuilding business. He listed the business for sale and had a brochure printed that described the business and stated that during 1981, the business grossed $581,117 and netted $142,727, Fred H. Campbell saw the brochure and inquired about buying the business. Campbell hired a CPA to review McClure’s business records and tax returns, but the CPA could not reconcile them with the income claimed for the business in the brochure. When Campbell asked McClure about the discrepancy, McClure stated that the business records and tax returns did not accurately reflect the cash flow or profits of the business because it was such a high-cash operation that much of the cash was not being reported to the Internal Revenue service on tax returns. McClure signed a warranty that stated that the true income of the business was as represented in the brochure. Campbell bought the business based on these representations. However, the business, although operated in substantially the same manner as when owned by McClure, failed to yield a net income similar to that warranted by McClure. Evidence showed that McClure’s representations were substantially overstated. Campbell sued McClure for damages for fraud.
The question is who wins?
The question is who wins?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by saleh2009. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Point 1:
This is a UK-based site. UK laws can be substantially different to those of the USA (where I assume that you're based), so you would be well-advised to post any future questions on a US-based site, such as
http://www.answerbag.com/
or
http://answers.yahoo.com/
Point 2:
You won't get very far in your legal studies if you rely on getting others to answer your questions. You're meant to have attended the lectures, to have read the textbooks and to know where to research your answers.
Point 3:
Campbell's case was invalid, so McClure won. See here:
http://chestofbooks.c...lid-In-Any-Event.html
Chris
This is a UK-based site. UK laws can be substantially different to those of the USA (where I assume that you're based), so you would be well-advised to post any future questions on a US-based site, such as
http://www.answerbag.com/
or
http://answers.yahoo.com/
Point 2:
You won't get very far in your legal studies if you rely on getting others to answer your questions. You're meant to have attended the lectures, to have read the textbooks and to know where to research your answers.
Point 3:
Campbell's case was invalid, so McClure won. See here:
http://chestofbooks.c...lid-In-Any-Event.html
Chris
Thanks for the answer, I know I have to do my work to learn more, but I should collect many thoughts about cases assignment. Some people think that I try to find someone to do my own work, but the fact is that the teacher needs more than two thoughts about the case with the reference. According to the two thoughts, I have to present my final thought about the case and show the evidences that prove my final thoughts.
Thanks
Thanks
saleh, that's the point. When we study law, we have to learn the skill of finding what both sides can argue.So having someone else provide one side's argument, or part of it, doesn't help.With practice you'll find arguments which nobody has thought of. In a law practice you'll still be doing that, and nearly all of them will be untenable. Then you have to learn to spot the ones that look untenable but which are right !
At a more advanced level ,in practice, you have to spot the ones that can be established on the evidence. Plenty of good arguments can be seen on the agreed facts in an exam question. Unfortunately, real cases depend on human beings giving evidence. You need to judge what the evidence will sound like when they give it, how credible it will sound after they've been cross-examined, if indeed they 'come up to proof', that is say what you think they are going to say !
At a more advanced level ,in practice, you have to spot the ones that can be established on the evidence. Plenty of good arguments can be seen on the agreed facts in an exam question. Unfortunately, real cases depend on human beings giving evidence. You need to judge what the evidence will sound like when they give it, how credible it will sound after they've been cross-examined, if indeed they 'come up to proof', that is say what you think they are going to say !