In discussions with the sales representative for Chicken Country Farms ("CCF"), Esther agreed to purchase 12,000 eggs provided they were freshly laid and would be delivered on the morning of April 1. The sales representative said the price would be approximately $5,000.00 but she would see if CCF would give a better price. Esther thought this was reasonable since the going retail rate for farm fresh eggs was $6.50 per dozen.

On March 2 Esther signed the following contract that was prepared by CCF.

"CCF agrees to sell and Esther Burney agrees to purchase up to 12,000 eggs at a price of $5.00 per unit to be delivered on April 1. CCF's maximum liability for failure to deliver shall be limited to $1.00/unit to a maximum of $500.00."

Esther had planned to hard boil and paint the eggs as soon as they were delivered and had entered into contracts to sell the 12,000 painted eggs to local retailers for $10.00/dozen. It was a required term of those agreements that the eggs be painted and delivered to the retailers on the morning of April 4 so they could be sold prior to Easter.

On April 1, CCF emailed Esther and advised that the delivery would be one day late because of mechanical difficulties with their delivery van but they were loaded and would be delivered by 9:00 a.m. The delivery from CCF arrived on April 2 at 9:00 a.m.

Esther expressed disappointment with the late delivery and said she was uncertain whether she would be able to meet her commitments to paint and deliver the eggs. The driver said it wasn't his issue and he could take the eggs back if she was refusing delivery. Feeling she had no choice, Esther told him to leave the eggs and signed the bill of lading that acknowledged receipt and contained a promise to pay the full purchase price within 7 days.

Esther did not take time to inspect the eggs upon delivery. Later that morning upon removing the eggs from the cartons (the eggs were packed in cartons of 100) she discovered that there were only 11,300 eggs in total and that 350 of the eggs were cracked and 500 were "medium" in size which she would not be able to sell to her retailers. In response to her inquiries, CCF advised that (i) the 11,300 eggs were all that their hens had laid, (ii) there was no size stipulation in the contract, (iii) Esther had every opportunity to inspect the eggs and had signed the bill of lading and (iv) the eggs were all perfect when they left the farm.

Esther then contacted a number of other farms and discovered that she could obtain eggs elsewhere 2 for immediate delivery at $3.00 per dozen. If they were delivered that evening (April 2) she could arrange for additional labour at a cost of $500.00 to meet her delivery deadline of April 4 for her retailers.

Esther calls you on April 2 at 2:00 p.m. with the following questions and requests an immediate analysis and response:

(i) Esther claims that she was under duress when the driver threatened to take back the eggs and wants to know if her agreement with CCF can be set aside on that basis.

(ii) Is there any other basis upon which Esther can discharge the contract, return the eggs and purchase 12,000 eggs from the other suppliers?

(iii) Since Esther did not inspect the eggs at the time of delivery does the principle of "Caveat Emptor" apply?

(iv) What remedies, if any, does Esther have against CCF? Does the principle of mitigation apply? If Esther is unable to meet the deadline for delivery to her retailers and is then sued by her retailers for their lost profits can this be included in her claim?

(v) Esther does not believe CCF's claim that the eggs were inspected and that none were cracked when they were loaded in the delivery van and the driver instructed to deliver them. Would it make a difference whether the eggs were cracked before or after they were loaded?

(vi) CCF has billed Esther for 1,200 units (10 eggs per unit) at $5.00/unit being a total of $6,000.00. Esther thought the agreed price was $5.00/dozen or $5,000.00. CCF claims that it sells its eggs on a wholesale basis which is always calculated on the basis of 10 eggs/unit. Esther thinks that there was either a misrepresentation or mistake and asks whether there is any legal remedy.

Required: Provide a legal analysis of the issues raised by Esther. Be certain to explain the applicable legal principles and how they apply to the facts as part of your analysis.

3. (9 points) Using your data from Part II, calculate the molar heat of dissolution of NH.NO, in kJ/mol. Calculate the % error compared to the value you obtained in question 2. Assume the specific heat of the solution is the same as pure water, 4.184 J/g C. Show work. 6- Advanced Micro Devices TAXAS Instruments 2008 200 2007 200 2008 2008 200 2007 Total assets $ 7.675.0 100.0% $ 11.850.0 100.0% $ 11.9830 100.0% $ 12,647.0 100.015 Total liabilities 27,7570 101. 125 8,560.0 215970 21.8%E 2169270 2134 Total owners' equity $ (82.0) 2.980.0 25.0%/S 8 326.0 8.975.0 78.79 Total liabilities and owners equity $ 7,676.0 100.0% 5 11,650.0 . 100.094 5 11,9230 100.0% $ 126670 100.0% REQUIRED Income statement questions: 1. For 2008, which company has higher total revenues? Are total revenues for each company higher or lower over the two year period? 2. What is the percent change in total revenues from 2007 to 2008 for each company? 3. Is the percent of total expenses to total revenues for each company increasing or decreasing over the two year period? Balance sheet questions: 4. For 2008, which company has higher assets? Are total assets for each company higher or lower over the two year period? 5. What is the percent change in total assets from 2007 to 2008 for each company? 6. Is the percent of total liabilities to total liabilities + owners' equity increasing or decreasing? As a result, is there more risk that each company could not pay its debts? Integrative income statement and balance sheet questions: 7. Are the companies operating efficiently by using the least amount of asset investment to generate a given level of total revenues? Compute total asset turnover for each company for 2008C O extomheducation.com/rimipx Apps [ New Tab CamipeWhitney 1 Shared with Sydney c. Hough, Luck, and Cummings operate a local accounting firm as a partnership. After working together for several yours, they have decided to liquidate the partnership's property. The partners have prepared the folowing balance sheet 540 000 Liabison $ 30,000 Cash 30,000 Hough, loan 41000 Luck, loan 150,000 Noncash ajob 202 000 Hough, capital Luck, capital 241000 Cummings, capital 41 040 Total mascots $20 007000 Toil Habilrios and capital $283,000 Assume that the profits and losses are split 2:4:4 to Hough, Luck, and Cummings, respectively, and that quidation expenses are only $26,000. The firm sells the noncash assets for $100,000; All three of thong partners are personally insolvent. (Do not round intermediate calculations. ] Hough, Luck, Loan Cummings, Loan and and Capital Capital Capital Beginning balancing Lose on disposal Liquidation expenses Capital balances Allocation of Cummings' deficit balance Capital balances Allocation of Luck's deficit balance Final distribution d, Following the liquidation of all poncash astols, The parmership of Redmond, Ledbetter. Watson, and Sandridge has the following account balances Redmond, loan Rodmond, capital post 181 000) Ledbatter, social CION] Hutton, capital (30) 5000 Sandridge, capital MOT 35090 Redmond is personally intoivent Redmond, Loan and Ledbetter, Watson, Sandridge, Capital Capital Capital Capital Mlocation of Redmond's deficit balance Capital balances Contribution by Ledbuffer and Watson Final distribution Plotarences .Book & Resources Problem liquidation Lolming Objective: 15-01 Determine amounts to be puld to partner Type here to search e 9Question 6 of 6 2Points The surface area of a solid oral dosage form Select the correct FESPGHSE'.' O affects the dissolution rate 0 does not affect the mass rate of dissolution O affects the mass rate of dissolution and also the dissolution rate Q affects the mass rate of dissolution O does not affect the mass rate of dissolution or the dissolution rate