On January 15, 2012, Anders brought an action against Barnes for ...

[Alygatorr01285]

On January 15, 2012, Anders brought an action against Barnes for breach of a contract for the sale of electronic parts. The breach occurred on January 10, 2008, and Anders discovered the breach on January 20, 2008. The state statute of limitations for contract actions is five years. Barnes raised the UCC statute of limitations as a defense to the action. Is this defense valid?

Question 2

What role has eminent domain played in the real estate market collapse that began in 2008?
 A)Eminent domain has not played a role because it is used for gaining access to land for purposes of right-of-ways
 B)Cities have used eminent domain to take over foreclosed and abandoned residences
 C)Eminent domain has been used in lieu of foreclosure
 D)Eminent domain has been used to take over certain subprime loans from lenders

[duke02]

Answer to Question 1

Yes. Judgment will be for Barnes. Contracts for the sale of goods are governed by the UCC statute of limitations, which is four (4 ) years from the date the cause of action arises. Thus, the five-year state statute of limitations for contracts does not apply. The cause of action arose on January 10, 2008, the date on which the contract was breached. It is irrelevant that Barnes did not learn of the breach until January 20, 2008. The action was brought on January 15, 2012, which is more than four (4 ) years after the cause of action arose on January 10, 2008. Therefore, the action is barred by the UCC statute of limitations.

Answer to Question 2

B

[Alygatorr01285]

Thank you

[duke02]

No problemo