Your chart should have 30 accounts exactly and include the following:
21 regular control accounts. These accounts should come from each major accounting category (assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses) as might be needed for a merchandising company.
5 subsidiary accounts. Your subsidiary accounts should be in the same section of your chart of accounts (e.g., 5 accounts receivable customer subsidiary accounts or 5 inventory item subsidiary accounts or 5 accounts payable vendor subsidiary accounts, etc.).
4 contra accounts:
2 must be contra-asset accounts (1 short-term account and 1 long-term account).
1 must be a contra-liability account.
1 must be a contra-revenue account.
Your chart of accounts should include
Account number
Account title
Account type (asset, liability, equity, revenue or expense)
Collected cash for services Account #1 Account Type Increase/Decrease Debit/Credit Account #2 Account Type Increase/Decrease Debit/Credit Purchased equipment on account Account #1 Account Type Increase/Decrease Debit/Credit V Account #2 Account Type Increase/Decrease Debit/Credit VQuestion 6 1 pts Rob owns Solar Panels Corporation, He uses Solarl's funds to pay his personal expenses, creates Thermal Power Inc. to engage in the same business as Solar, transfers Solar's assets to Thermal, and petitions Solar into bankruptcy. This most likely warrants O a bonus to Rob for financial maneuvers. O a discharge for Solar in bankruptcy. O a pierce of the corporate veil. O a review of Thermal's articles of incorporation.25. Consider a bivariate data set. We have: N, Mean, SD for both x and for y. With only these descriptive statistics, Pearson r a. can be calculated if N is large b. can be roughly estimated c. can be calculated d. cannot be calculated e. none of the above 26. Note that this is "an empirical question" that can be probed by a call to a power function from package "pwr". How will using a one-sided statistical test of correlation, rather than a two-sided test, impact statistical power, all other factors being equal? a. it will not influence statistical power b. it will increase statistical power c. it depends on alpha d. it depends on the size of r e. it depends on sample size f. it will decrease statistical power g. it depends on the desired level of significance h. none of the above 27. It is common for Pearson correlation to be statistically significant when a. sample size is large b. each variable is a "random variable" c. the Pearson assumptions are not met d. the data were measured with great error e. sample size is small f. the data are not bivariately normal 4. the Pearson assumptions are met h. the data are nonlinear i. none of the above 28. Reflecting modern statistical thought, which of the following is the proper way for correlation to be reported in a paper submitted to a peer-review scientific journal. a. p = 0.072, r = 0.55 b. r 0.05 d. r = 0.55, p = 0.072 e. none of the aboveW WordDoutter - Count ward : | G hegoofhitions - Coughs : |0 Assignment db Paper C) Chopp: The Lom of Henkho C "ereader.chegg convW/bockw/978156783879cf /3/241/4/2/403 72/280-0 pootnoted dack thinking there would be a separate opention additiond vertebrae had is be fined. She aacres the fact four worebone wow fined combined with delendors ourraves and failing to won herof specific there my mention how that the would not have prisonted in the surgery bad the kross those things the bys spit withheld fran her prior is wingery. Defendant testified plainhill win fully iadvised as to the nature of her problem and the scope of directive margery. He acknowledges he did not advise ber of the bund of vocal chord fair/ paralysis. He believed the possibility of sch occurpiece was negligible and outweighed by the danger of undue apprehension if waming of the risk was ghom. one type of treatment and subicgundy performers wahannually different Unamail for which coment was not obtained, there is acker oak of battery. However, when in indisked potential complication meals, the occurence of which was not an integral part of the treatment procedure hal merely a known risk, the courts are divided in the have of whether this should be deemed ta be a billmy er negligence. We myfree with the majorly tread The beating diary hand het parend for three chuandenies slow a dork performs as spcation in which the patval has nd camental, When the parra gives penmasuis in porlien one type of breadmeat and the docks performs water, the requisite clenon of deliberate incol to deviate from the oument given is porsen. However, when the pitiful coments to certain treatment and the bacter perform that beatment but in walicloned inherent complication with a low proffifty occur no intentiond deviation from the consol given appoint rather, the doctor in ofdining coined may have failed to mori his duc ciuc duty A odiskne pertinent information. In that shustios the action should be planted in negligence. From air approval of this malyis it should be eleve we believe the battery or trespass theiry plealed by plein ' in this case is Emited inhis applicahiity to surgery to which the patient hes not conicnied. There mud be a fission was a ballery is bespies. But the dogs ool claim dienins for a recoul fusion. bat asks damari became of injury In the laryngeal nene during surgery. The cubeence is undisputed that whether one on the fuckisu wire to be done the path to the said column had to be claimed by retraction of the visual shlomi. Hence, any injury caused by wach ortraction occurred during a procedure to which consent had been given. Reaction of the visceral ochma during the surgery was not a batery of brespin. We have no owessun to reach de question whether failure to advise plaintiff of the the of laryngeal nerve injury would is be circumdrives of din ous have proced a Jury have on meclipse, but we to poli on hand recovery on wich isaid in preclude unless a plaintiff also colddishes he would not have whiritied to the provedan if he had been wuvbed of the risk, ... There is no evidence planif would have wifiheld her consent in thes Altimed. I . lies fee care been then? Does it need to bat 2. What is the "woooal foundaim fact," and how does "canmin caperince" miller in relation to in 3. The opinion sines "There men be a subsuial differcare between the surgery copied in and the sugery which is done for a battery case to be rude]." What would amount to a "suleimuial differtive"in your mmill What if decal career hal been divinened and clainly removed with no aftereffects? Would that procure be a sbanned dillennce andifying damages le bowker com though to cher inun tial, in foul. 4. Why did the cart have mo action" to dride whether failure to added the plaisulf of the rock of aers injury rabed s negligence isa Notes 1. 61 AM. JUR. 2d. Physicians and Surgeons $ 208 (1981), Baldor v. Hopon, 81 80. 24658 (Fla. 1954), reb's denied, BI So. 20 661 01 1a. 1935); ANGELA R. HOLDER, MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LAW 47 (2d ed, 1978). DeFilippo v. Preston, 53 Del. 539, 173 A.24 333 (1961). 4. Miller w. Toles, 183 Mich, 252, 150 N.W. 118 (1914). 173 Aa 40
