1. lamo Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Mendenhall, 937 P.2d 69 (Nev. 1997). John C. Clark, using an alias, rented a Lexus from Alamo Rent-A-Car in San Diego, California. Clark never returned the car to Alamo, stealing it and obtaining a California "quick title" using forged signatures. He stole the vehicle from Alamo, then advertised in the Las Vegas Review Journal newspaper and sold the car to Terry and Vyonne Mendenhall for $34,000 in cash. The Mendenhalls made improvements to the car, had it insured, smog and safety tested, registered, licensed, and titled in the state of Utah. When Alamo reported the car stolen, the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles seized the auto and returned it to Alamo. The Mendenhalls sued Alamo. The trial court concluded that the Mendenhalls had purchased the car for value and without notice that it was stolen, and were bona fide purchasers entitled to the Lexus. Alamo appealed. Please rule.

1. What is the issue in this case? Make sure your issue is stated as a question.
2. What rule of law governs this case?
3. Please analyze the case, applying the rule of law to the facts of the case.
4. What is your ruling on this case, your Honor? Who wins and why

2.WarrantiesResearch and locate a sales slip with a warranty on it, read the warranty, and then rewrite the warranty in plain English.

1. Explain exactly what the company will pay for and will not pay for if something goes wrong.
2. What express warranties are present in the warranty you chose?
3. What implied warranties are present in the warranty you chose?
4. Has the business disclaimed any warranties?
5. Explain.What recommendations would you make to the business to increase customer satisfaction with this warranty?