Identify the true statement concerning the law of principal and agent. Agency is only created by way of a contract. The principal and his agent owe each other the same duties. An agent who puts himself in a position where his interests conflict with those of his principal is in breach of his duties even though no act comes to his principal. An agent with no express authority can never bind his principal into a contract with a third party. An agent can never be liable to the third party himself while the principal will bear no such liability. QUESTION 16 Ravinder is the sole proprietor of a shoe store. He is also a partner in a restaurant, which has recently been sued for negligence after countles got sick from the salmon Alfredo dinner special. Which of the following statements is true? The shoe store assets will only be avallable to the successful plaintiffs in the restaurant action if the shoe store is operated by Ravinder in c with the restaurant. Because of the concept of limited liability, Ravinder can lose only what he has invested in the restaurant. The successful plaintiffs in the restaurant action can only go after the assets of the shoe store if Ravinder was the actual person who prepar Alfredo on the night in question. Although the successful plaintiffs in the restaurant action can go after Ravinder's personal assets, they cannot go after the assets of the shor because the shoe store is a separate legal entity from Ravinder. If the plaintiffs win their lawsuit against the restaurant, they can look to the asseds of the shoe store to pay off the debt. QUESTION 17 In which one of the following situations will the transaction not be binding on the principal? A salesperson at a men's clothing store has heard a rumour that the store will be going out of business. The boss is out of the store when a cu who has heard the same thing comes in and offers to purchase all of the stock, display cases, and fixtures. The salesperson accepts on behalf employer. A real estate salesperson, after disclosing the fact he is a real estate agent to his client, purchases the house the client is selling for himself. An employee of a flower shop is sent to the flower market every week to make purchases. This week he is told to buy only roses, but he can't p a tremendous deal on daisies and purchases a large quantity of them for the store. A chauffeur, going against specific instructions, purchases a new car for his employer. The employer has done nothing to lead the seller to belie chauffeur has such authority, but he is persuaded by the chauffeur to go for a divive before returning the car. A truck driver who is not an agent (no actual, impled, or apparent authority) enters into a contract on behalf of his employer to sell his cargo of n tomatoes after the truck breaks down and he can't get hold of the boss. Identify the true statement concerning the law of principal and agent. Agency is only created by way of a contract. The principal and his agent owe each other the same duties. An agent who puts himself in a position where his interests conflict with those of his principal is in breach of his duties even though no act comes to his principal. An agent with no express authority can never bind his principal into a contract with a third party. An agent can never be liable to the third party himself while the principal will bear no such liability. QUESTION 16 Ravinder is the sole proprietor of a shoe store. He is also a partner in a restaurant, which has recently been sued for negligence after countles got sick from the salmon Alfredo dinner special. Which of the following statements is true? The shoe store assets will only be avallable to the successful plaintiffs in the restaurant action if the shoe store is operated by Ravinder in c with the restaurant. Because of the concept of limited liability, Ravinder can lose only what he has invested in the restaurant. The successful plaintiffs in the restaurant action can only go after the assets of the shoe store if Ravinder was the actual person who prepar Alfredo on the night in question. Although the successful plaintiffs in the restaurant action can go after Ravinder's personal assets, they cannot go after the assets of the shor because the shoe store is a separate legal entity from Ravinder. If the plaintiffs win their lawsuit against the restaurant, they can look to the asseds of the shoe store to pay off the debt. QUESTION 17 In which one of the following situations will the transaction not be binding on the principal? A salesperson at a men's clothing store has heard a rumour that the store will be going out of business. The boss is out of the store when a cu who has heard the same thing comes in and offers to purchase all of the stock, display cases, and fixtures. The salesperson accepts on behalf employer. A real estate salesperson, after disclosing the fact he is a real estate agent to his client, purchases the house the client is selling for himself. An employee of a flower shop is sent to the flower market every week to make purchases. This week he is told to buy only roses, but he can't p a tremendous deal on daisies and purchases a large quantity of them for the store. A chauffeur, going against specific instructions, purchases a new car for his employer. The employer has done nothing to lead the seller to belie chauffeur has such authority, but he is persuaded by the chauffeur to go for a divive before returning the car. A truck driver who is not an agent (no actual, impled, or apparent authority) enters into a contract on behalf of his employer to sell his cargo of n tomatoes after the truck breaks down and he can't get hold of the boss