business law class

User Generated

Nan511

Business Finance

Description

ive attached all the information in the file below . please let me know if you have any questions. thank you in advance

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Prepare answers to the following chapter-end Critical Legal Thinking Cases from this week's reading. • • Case 16.1: Specific Performance on page Case 18.7: Goods or Service on page 313 Your responses should be well-rounded and analytical, and should not just provide a conclusion or an opinion without explaining the reason for the choice. For full credit, you need to use the material from the week's lectures, text, and/or discussions when responding to the questions. It is important that you incorporate the question into your response (i.e., restate the question in your introduction) and explain the legal principle(s) or concept(s) from the text that underlies your judgment. For each question, you should provide at least one reference in APA format (intext citations and references as described in detail in the Syllabus). Each answer should be double spaced in 12-point font, and your response to each question should be between 300 and 1,000 words in length. 16.1 Specific Performance The California and Hawaiian Sugar Company (C&H), a California corporation, is an agricultural cooperative owned by 14 sugar plantations in Hawaii. It transports raw sugar to its refinery in Crockett, California. Sugar is a seasonal crop, with about 70 percent of the harvest occurring between April and October. C&H requires reliable seasonal shipping of the raw sugar from Hawaii to California. Sugar stored on the ground or left unharvested suffers a loss of sucrose and goes to waste. After C&H was notified by its normal shipper that it would be withdrawing its services at a specified date in the future, C&H commissioned the design of a large hybrid vessel—a tug of a catamaran design consisting of a barge attached to the tug. After substantial negotiation, C&H contracted with Sun Ship, Inc. (Sun Ship), a Pennsylvania corporation, to build the vessel for $25,405,000. The contract gave Sun Ship one and three quarter years to build and deliver the ship to C&H. The contract also contained a liquidated damages clause calling for a payment of $17,000 per day for each day that the vessel was not delivered to C&H after the agreed-upon delivery date. Sun Ship did not complete the vessel until eight and one-half months after the agreed-upon delivery date. Upon delivery, the vessel was commissioned and christened the Moku Pahu. During the season that the boat had not been delivered, C&H was able to find other means of shipping the crop from Hawaii to its California refinery. Evidence established that actual damages suffered by C&H because of the nonavailability of the vessel from Sun Ship were $368,000. When Sun Ship refused to pay the liquidated damages, C&H filed suit to require payment of $4,413,000 in liquidated damages under the contract. Can C&H recover the liquidated damages from Sun Ship? California and Hawaiian Sugar Company v. Sun Ship, Inc., 794 F.2d 1433, Web 1986 U.S. App. Lexis 27376 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) 18.7 Good or Service Frances Hector entered Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (CedarsSinai), Los Angeles, California, for a surgical operation on her heart. During the operation, a pacemaker was installed in Hector. The pacemaker, which was manufactured by American Technology, Inc., was installed at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center by Hector’s physician, Dr. Eugene Kompaniez. The pacemaker was defective, causing injury to Hector. Hector sued Cedars-Sinai Medical Center under Article 2 (Sales) of the UCC to recover damages for breach of warranty of the pacemaker. Hector alleged that the surgical operation was primarily a sale of a good and therefore covered by the UCC. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center argued that the surgical operation was primarily a service and therefore the UCC did not apply. Who wins? Hector v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 180 Cal.App.3d 493, 225 Cal.Rptr. 595, Web 1986 Cal. App. Lexis 1523 (Court of Appeal of California) What is the public policy that supports the mixed sale doctrine?
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

The paper is coming out well.
Attached.

Running Head: LAW CASES DISCUSSION

1

Law Cases Discussion
Name
Instructor
Institutional Affiliation
Date

LAW CASES DISCUSSION

2

16.1 Specific Performance
In the case of specific performance, it is important to confirm the facts of the case and to
ascertain whether liquidated damages were present in the case. From the case, California hired
Sun Ship to build a barge. In their contract, a liquidated clause was included requiring Sun Ship
to pay for the damages if the barge was not completed within a specified period of one and three
quarters of a year (Anderson, 1987). Sun Ship agreed on the terms of the contract and accepted
the said liquated damages before entering into the contract. By entering into the contract to
supply C&H with the said barge, Sun Ship agreed to the terms thus granting C&H the right to
demand Sun Ship to pay for the daily liquidated damages in the event it misses the stipulated
deadline. Sun missed the dead...


Anonymous
Just what I needed. Studypool is a lifesaver!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags