Anne Robertson obtained telescopes from the See-Well Optics Company at dealer prices on the pretense of being a dealer in optical equipment. See-Well later determined that Robertson was not, had never been, and did not plan to be a dealer in optics. By the time these facts emerged, Robertson had succeeded in selling the telescopes to several individuals located throughout the country. These buyers had responded to advertisements placed by Robertson, who again had represented herself as a dealer in optical equipment. The equipment never the less was defected. The buyers had purchased the telescopes in good faith at prices consistent with comparable equipment. See-Well located these buyers and demanded that the telescopes be returned as property obtained through fraud.

DISCUSS THE FOLLLOWING USING ISSUES OF LAW THAT YOU WOULD

ARGUE THAT APPLY.....

DO THE BUYERS OF THESE TELESCOPES HAVE TO RETURN THEIR PURCHASES?

DISCUSS YOUR REASONING/RULE OF LAW

DISCUSS WHAT CLAIMS DOES THE DEALER HAVE

DISCUSS WHAT CLAIMS DOES THE BUYER HAVE

DISCUSS THE ISSUES/LAWS AS THEY RELATE TO WARRENTIES AND PRODUCT LIABILITIES

DISCUSS YOUR CONCLUSIONS........