In Lightle v. Real Estate Commission, where Lightle was a real ...

[Pineappleeh]

In Lightle v. Real Estate Commission, where Lightle was a real estate agent involved in the sale of a home, the Alaska high court held that the claim of fraudulent misrepresentation failed because plaintiff could not establish scienter.
 a. True
  b. False
  Indicate whether the statement is true or false

Question 2

In Orkal Industries v. Array Connector, where Orkal bought parts from Array by sending an order form, but Array confirmed with its own form that contained different terms. Orkal did not object to the different terms until litigation arose later at which point the added terms mattered. The courts held that under the UCC:
 a. the buyer, Orkal, controlled the terms, so the original order form controls the contract
  b. the buyer, Orkal, would have to provide new consideration for any change in the terms of the original contract
  c. the seller, Array, controlled because Orkal's form contained major defects that made it fail as sufficient to create a contact
  d. the seller, Array, controlled because under UCC 2-207, a sellers terms always control e. none of the other choices are correct

[Dominic]

Answer to Question 1

FALSE

Answer to Question 2

e

[Pineappleeh]

Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it

[aliotak]

Gracias!