This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: Limitation of Remedies. Wilk Paving, Inc, bought a street-paving asphalt roller from ... (Read 28 times)

fahad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
Limitation of Remedies. Wilk Paving, Inc, bought a street-paving asphalt roller from Southworth-Milton, Inc In large capital letters, on the front of the contract, was printed, ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON REVERSE SIDE. A clause on the back stated that under no circumstances shall seller . . . be held liable for any . . . consequential damages. In a hurry to close the deal, Wilk's representative did not notice this clause, and Southworth's representative did not call attention to it. Within sixty days, the roller needed the first of what became continuous repairs for mechanical problems. Wilk asked Southworth for its money back. When Southworth refused, Wilk sued Southworth, seeking the purchase price and consequential damages. Was the clause limiting damages enforceable in these circumstances? Explain.

Question 2

A senior manager at Don Reid Ford is an example of a(n):
 a. agent
  b. employee
  c. employee with agency powers d. independent contractor
  e. agent and independent contractor



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

ttt030911

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
Answer to Question 1

Limitation of remedies
The court awarded the price of the paver to Wilk but denied consequential damages, and both parties appealed. Wilk argued that the clause limiting remedies was unconscionable. Affirming the lower court's award, the Supreme Court of Vermont held, among other things, that the limitation clause was enforceable. The court noted that it was clearly stated on the front page of the contract: Additional terms and conditions on reverse side. Besides, when the deal was struck, both parties were commercial entities experienced in business matters. Plaintiff's lack of attention, alone, cannot justify dispensing with the unambiguous contractual limitation of remedy contained in the contract. Absent a showing of unfair surprise or oppres-sion, the disputed term cannot be invalidated as unconscionable.

Answer to Question 2

c




fahad

  • Member
  • Posts: 570
Reply 2 on: Jun 24, 2018
Excellent


frankwu0507

  • Member
  • Posts: 322
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it

 

Did you know?

The most destructive flu epidemic of all times in recorded history occurred in 1918, with approximately 20 million deaths worldwide.

Did you know?

The word drug comes from the Dutch word droog (meaning "dry"). For centuries, most drugs came from dried plants, hence the name.

Did you know?

More than one-third of adult Americans are obese. Diseases that kill the largest number of people annually, such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, stroke, and hypertension, can be attributed to diet.

Did you know?

For pediatric patients, intravenous fluids are the most commonly cited products involved in medication errors that are reported to the USP.

Did you know?

Congestive heart failure is a serious disorder that carries a reduced life expectancy. Heart failure is usually a chronic illness, and it may worsen with infection or other physical stressors.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library