The Martin brothers, Larry and Kent, each own a home and share ownership of tools,
equipment, and home furnishings. They also have three vehicles, two of which are
owned by Kent, and the third is owned jointly. Their property is covered under
policies issued by Insurance Company, and all policies refer to the description of
property insured as "property of the Martin brothers." Since the insurance policies are
ambiguous as to the property insured, parol evidence can establish
Select one:
A. Whether the insurance contract is valid because of its ambiguous wording.
B. Whether the parties' intention was to cover property the brothers owned as
partners, property they owned individually, or both.
C. The distribution of the property.
D. Any illegality, fraud, or mistake involved in the brothers' attempt to obtain insurance
coverage.
Give this one a try later!
, B. Whether the parties' intention was to cover property the brothers owned
as partners, property they owned individually, or both.
The act of leaving a dangerous article such as a gun or car with a person who the
lender knows, or should know, is likely to use it in an unreasonably risky manner is
known as
Select one:
A. Negligent entrustment.
B. Contributory negligence.
C. Negligent supervision.
D. The dangerous instrumentality doctrine.
Give this one a try later!
A. Negligent entrustment.
Hugo opened a small cookie shop on Main Street. He entered into a requirements
contract with Lily, a sugar supplier. Hugo lied to Lily during the negotiations of the
contract and told her that he owned a coffee shop. Hugo erroneously thought that he
might get a better price from Lily if she thought he sold coffee instead of cookies,
but, in fact, Lily's price had nothing to do with Hugo's business. Lily eventually found
out that Hugo lied, and she wanted to use her discovery to terminate the contract. Is
this contract enforceable?
Select one:
A. No, the contract is not enforceable, because Hugo committed fraud when he lied
about the nature of his shop.
B. Yes, the contract is enforceable, and Lily does not have any legal justification for
terminating the contract.
C. Yes, the contract is enforceable, but Lily can choose to avoid the contract because
of Hugo's misrepresentation.
D. No, the contract is not enforceable, because it lacks definite terms regarding the
parties to the contract.
, Give this one a try later!
B. Yes, the contract is enforceable, and Lily does not have any legal
justification for terminating the contract.
As an insurance legal professional, Mehmet understands the importance of
representations and warranties in insurance policies. He knows that
Select one:
A. Representations are written in the policy or incorporated by reference, while
warranties can be oral or written.
B. The law presumes representations to be material while warranties must be proved
to be material.
C. Representations require strict compliance, while warranties require substantial
truth.
D. Representations are indirect inducements to the contract, while warranties are part
of the final insurance contract.
Give this one a try later!
D. Representations are indirect inducements to the contract, while
warranties are part of the final insurance contract.
George left his camera at the repair shop to be fixed. An unknown arsonist burned the
shop to the ground, destroying George's camera. The fire marshal found no fault with
any of the repair shop's fire protection practices and systems. Under the
circumstances,
Select one:
A. The bailee is not responsible for the destruction of the camera.
B. The bailee and bailor are equally at fault for the destruction of the camera.
C. The bailee is responsible for the destruction of the camera.
D. The bailor is at fault for the destruction of the camera.
Give this one a try later!
equipment, and home furnishings. They also have three vehicles, two of which are
owned by Kent, and the third is owned jointly. Their property is covered under
policies issued by Insurance Company, and all policies refer to the description of
property insured as "property of the Martin brothers." Since the insurance policies are
ambiguous as to the property insured, parol evidence can establish
Select one:
A. Whether the insurance contract is valid because of its ambiguous wording.
B. Whether the parties' intention was to cover property the brothers owned as
partners, property they owned individually, or both.
C. The distribution of the property.
D. Any illegality, fraud, or mistake involved in the brothers' attempt to obtain insurance
coverage.
Give this one a try later!
, B. Whether the parties' intention was to cover property the brothers owned
as partners, property they owned individually, or both.
The act of leaving a dangerous article such as a gun or car with a person who the
lender knows, or should know, is likely to use it in an unreasonably risky manner is
known as
Select one:
A. Negligent entrustment.
B. Contributory negligence.
C. Negligent supervision.
D. The dangerous instrumentality doctrine.
Give this one a try later!
A. Negligent entrustment.
Hugo opened a small cookie shop on Main Street. He entered into a requirements
contract with Lily, a sugar supplier. Hugo lied to Lily during the negotiations of the
contract and told her that he owned a coffee shop. Hugo erroneously thought that he
might get a better price from Lily if she thought he sold coffee instead of cookies,
but, in fact, Lily's price had nothing to do with Hugo's business. Lily eventually found
out that Hugo lied, and she wanted to use her discovery to terminate the contract. Is
this contract enforceable?
Select one:
A. No, the contract is not enforceable, because Hugo committed fraud when he lied
about the nature of his shop.
B. Yes, the contract is enforceable, and Lily does not have any legal justification for
terminating the contract.
C. Yes, the contract is enforceable, but Lily can choose to avoid the contract because
of Hugo's misrepresentation.
D. No, the contract is not enforceable, because it lacks definite terms regarding the
parties to the contract.
, Give this one a try later!
B. Yes, the contract is enforceable, and Lily does not have any legal
justification for terminating the contract.
As an insurance legal professional, Mehmet understands the importance of
representations and warranties in insurance policies. He knows that
Select one:
A. Representations are written in the policy or incorporated by reference, while
warranties can be oral or written.
B. The law presumes representations to be material while warranties must be proved
to be material.
C. Representations require strict compliance, while warranties require substantial
truth.
D. Representations are indirect inducements to the contract, while warranties are part
of the final insurance contract.
Give this one a try later!
D. Representations are indirect inducements to the contract, while
warranties are part of the final insurance contract.
George left his camera at the repair shop to be fixed. An unknown arsonist burned the
shop to the ground, destroying George's camera. The fire marshal found no fault with
any of the repair shop's fire protection practices and systems. Under the
circumstances,
Select one:
A. The bailee is not responsible for the destruction of the camera.
B. The bailee and bailor are equally at fault for the destruction of the camera.
C. The bailee is responsible for the destruction of the camera.
D. The bailor is at fault for the destruction of the camera.
Give this one a try later!
