A owes D P400 and P6,000 evidenced by two promissory notes. Later, a new loan of P300 was obtained. By express agreement, the three debts were consolidated into one promissory note of P3,800. That the last promissory note was to take the place of the others was agreed upon. Is there novation here?

2. D owes C P1,000,000. F, a friend of D, approaches C and tells him; "I will pay you what D owes you." C agrees. Is there expromission here?

3. D owes C P1,000,000. F, a friend of D, approaches C and tells him: "I will pay you what D owes you." From now on, consider me your debtor, not D. D is to be excused. "Do you agree?" C agrees. Is there expromission here?

4. A owes B P1,000,000. A proposed to B that C will pay A's debt, and that A will be released from all liabilities. B and C agree to the proposal. Later, when B tries to collect from A, he finds out that C is insolvent. It was proved that at the time of delegation, C was already insolvent but this was not known to A. neither was the insolvency of public knowledge. Nevertheless, B still sues A on the ground that it was A who made the proposal, and that therefore A really guaranteed C's insolvency. Decide.

5. A and B had a contract which they agreed to novate,provided the signatures of C and D could be obtained. But said signatures was never procured.

6. D and C entered into a contract whereby D was to give C P800,000 in cash. Later, they novated the contract by stipulating that instead of cash, D would give a particular car. Subsequently, the car was destroyed by a fortuitous event. Is D obliged to give P800,000?

7. A was forced to sign a promissory note to give B P500,000. Later the parties agreed voluntarily to let the subject matter be a precious stone. Although the first contract was voidable, the second one is all right because in the first contract, annulment could be claimed only by the debtor.

8. A promised to give B a car if B should pass his Law1 subject. Later, both agreed that what should be given would be a diamond ring. Nothing was mentioned in the second contract regarding the condition. Is th new obligation also subject to a suspensive condition?

9. A promised to give B a car unless X married Y. Later A and B agreed to change the object to a precious stone. No mention was made regarding any condition. Is the second obligation subject to a resolutory condition?

10. Suppose in the same given, X had already married Y before A and B novated their contract, what happens to the new obligation?

11. Ligaya has two creditors: Gloria, who is a mortgage creditor for P1,500,000, and Solita, who is an ordinary creditor for P600,000. Solita, without Ligaya's knowledge, paid Ligaya's debt of P1,500,000 to Gloria. Will Solita be subrogated in the rights of Gloria?

12. Suppose Solita paid Gloria only P1,300,000 for Ligaya's total indebtedness (Gloria agreed because of friendship), how much, concerning this debt, may Solita successfully recover from Ligaya?

13. Suppose in the previous problem, Solita paid the P1,300,000 to Gloria without Ligaya's knowledge, but it turns out that at said time of payment, Ligaya's debt had already been reduced to P300,000 (because of a prior partial payment), how much can Solita successfully recover from Ligaya concerning this debt?

14. Eubolo owes Luna P1,000,000 secured by a mortgage. Blesilda, a classmate of Eubolo, and having no connection with the contract at all, paid Luna the P1,000,000 with Eubolo's approval. Is Blesilda subrogated in Luna's place?

15. If in the previous given, Blesilda, who is Luna's friend, paid her only P700,000 for the extinguishment of Eubolo's debt, but the payment was made without the express or tacit approval of Eubolo, what would be Blesilda's rights, if any?

16. A owes B P500,000. With the consent of both, C pays B P250,000. Now B and C are the creditors of A to the amount of P250,000. Suppose A has only P250,000, who should be preferred?

2. One of the core principles I want students to take away from the class is what we've called the "economic decision-making rule," and informs our theory of individual behavior. a. Write what the economic decision-making rule is and define marginal analysis. b. Define sunk costs and opportunity costs and discuss which of the two should be included when engaging in marginal analysis. c. Explain three contexts where we have seen the economic-decision make rule, interpret it in these contexts, and explain how they inform optimal decision-making (for example, a perfectly competitive firm sets P=MC to maximize profits, which is an application of the economic decision-making rule). Consider a remote village with a limited, freely available water supply and no government intervention in the allocation of water. In economics, the resulting outcome of a situation such as this is often referred to as O the Coase theorem. 0 moral hazard. O asymmetric information. 0 the tragedy of the commons. O adverse selection. B - S2:OM4AB - AP Calculus AB - S2 / HW-8.2 ew Exercises, Question 003 ation by the method of separation of variables. dy = 2 (1 + 1 2) x2 2 4 4 dx the arbitrary constant in the general solution appears * (keeping the coefficient on the right-hand side) a QuestionSuppose we have a numeric variable as a predictor variable (e.g., bank account balance). Which of the following types of analyses might be appropriate when you have a numeric predictor? O ANOVA O regression O correlation O t-test O the general linear model Question 2 2 pts Which of the following correlation coefficients are valid and show the largest association between two variables? O 2.3 0.02 106 O -82Suppose you are performing an experiment where you randomly assign people to one of two experimental conditions (treatment versus control). Which analysis would be most appropriate? O ANOVA O regression O correlation O t-test O the general linear model Question 3 2 pts Which of the following Cohen's d values show the largest difference between the two treatments? O .3 O .9 O .6 O -1.2