Ray's office supply store was experiencing a faster-than-usual turnover of printer paper. In order to get a volume discount from his supplier, Ray ordered a shipment that was five times the size of his usual order and asked for it to be delivered to his storage facility. The seller arranged for the delivery as part of the contract. When the shipment arrived, Ray discovered that it was too large for the size of his storage unit, and he could accept only half of it. He told the carrier to return the rest of the shipment to the seller and paid the seller for the portion he accepted. The seller demanded that Ray accept and pay for all of the paper. If this were to go to trial, the court would likely rule: a. in favor of the seller, because Ray did not furnish facilities reasonably suited for receipt of the goods. b. in favor of Ray, since he has the right of revocation of acceptance. c. in favor of Ray, because his obligation to make payment doesn't go into effect until he actually receives the goods. d. in favor of the seller, since Ray has an obligation to make payment at the time and place he received 2 the goods. Jane bought a store that needed a lot of work before she opened her business. She hired Andy's General Contracting to do the work. In order to finish all the work in time for the grand opening on June 1, Andy's would have to lay all the new flooring by May 15. Knowing that it would take one full week for his crew to lay the floor, Andy ordered the materials from Floss Floors to be delivered to the job site on May 6. At the time, Andy told Floss that the opening of the store on time was dependent on Floss delivering the flooring materials on schedule. Floss had an issue with its suppliers and notified Andy on May 5 that the materials would not be available until May 22. Andy did not have time to find a different supplier. Jane had to push back her opening date and cancel her grand opening event. Besides the lost sales she would experience by the delayed opening, she would also lose money because of the costs involved in planning and advertising the event. Jane sued Andy for her losses. Andy, in turn, sued Floss. How will the court likely rule in Andy's suit against Floss Floors? a. In favor of Floss, as Floss has no obligations in Jane's contract with Andy b. In favor of Floss, as it cannot be responsible for goods it had not received from its suppliers c. In favor of Andy under the rule of perfect tender d. In favor of Andy because he suffered consequential damages