Bus Law 29

Front 1

If apparent authority is present, the pricipal is liable for even the unauthorized acts of the agent

Back 1

TRUE

Front 2

If ambiguity is present as to the principals intent, the court will look to the principals subjective intent

Back 2

FALSE

Front 3

Someone acts without authority, a "principal" can decide later to be bound by the actions as long as the "agent" indicates to the third party that he is acting for a principal, the "principal" knows all the material facts of the transaction, and the "principal" accepts the benefit of at least part of the transaction

Back 3

FALSE

Front 4

If Denise is hired to work as a cashier, she has the IMPLIED authority to do acts reasonably necessary to carry out her job

Back 4

TRUE

Front 5

The implied authority of an agent is the same as an agent's apparent authority

Back 5

FALSE

Front 6

Respondeat superior means let the master answer

Back 6

TRUE

Front 7

as a general rule, an agent is liable on contracts entered into on behalf of a fully disclosed principal.

Back 7

FALSE

Front 8

Erica's supervisor told her to arrange for a conference room at the Kelly Inn. Erica has express authority to contract for the room

Back 8

TRUE

Front 9

An act is not "within the scope of employment" if it is expressly forbidden, even if it is of the same general nature as an authorized

Back 9

FALSE

Front 10

The issue in apparent authority is what the principal has done to make the third party believe that the agent actually has authority

Back 10

TRUE

Front 11

An employer is generally liable for the intentional wrongful acts of his or her employees

Back 11

FALSE

Front 12

If a principal accepts the benefits of a whole unauthorized contract, the principal is deemed to have ratified the contract and is bound as if the act had been originally authorized

Back 12

TRUE

Front 13

If estoppel applies, the principal would be prevented from asserting that no agency relationship existed

Back 13

TRUE

Front 14

Maylin has the authority to delegate her tasks as an agent for Brian unless he has expressly restricted her from doing so

Back 14

FALSE

Front 15

An agent is always liable for his or her own torts committed within the scope of the agency relationship

Back 15

TRUE

Front 16

Jenny is a salesperson in a hardware store. She

Back 16

-is an agent of the store
-has express authority to do sales
-has implied authority to do sales
ALL OF THE ABOVE

Front 17

The doctrine of estoppel would most often apply in situations of

Back 17

apparent authority

Front 18

Exress authority can be created by

Back 18

-words
-conduct
-written words
ALL OF THE ABOVE

Front 19

Thomas manager of apt complex rented an apt to Donna. Donna complained about no hot water. Thomas hired a plumber to fix it but they didnt. a few days later, Donna moved out and sued the landlord and THomas for breach of contract.

Back 19

The landlord is liable, but not THomas

Front 20

In Dickinson v Charter Oaks court found

Back 20

a reasonable inference could be made that Carol Dickinson knowingly permitted her husband to act as having apparent authority

Front 21

Circus Pizza contracted with Art for bday parties. Circus did not investigate his backround of assaulting kids. Art assaulted a girl while working. Circus Pizza

Back 21

may be held liable on the basis of negligent hiring

Front 22

Kirk is bound by the acts of his agent, Tyra, if

Back 22

-Tyra has express, implied, or apparent authority
-for fairness, Kirk is estopped from denying that Tyra had authority
-Kirk fails to repudiate an unauthorized transaction after knowing all the materal facts of the transaction
ALL THE ABOVE

Front 23

Paula appointed Al to be her agent via a contract in writing that spelled out the scope of als authority. the contract provided that Al was not to disclose that he was acting on behalf of Paulsa. In entering into a contract for Paula, Al did not disclose to the third party that he was acting as an agent. In this case the principal was

Back 23

undisclosed

Front 24

When a principal is partially disclosed

Back 24

the agent and principal will be jointly and severally liable on the contract

Front 25

If an employer and employee are jointly and severally liable, the third party

Back 25

can collect the full award from either the employee or employer

Front 26

Mike worked for Franks Pizza. One day MIke decided to see his girlfriend Jacki 50 miles away. On his way he hit Chuck. Chuck is now suing both Mike and Franks for injuries.

Back 26

Franks is probably not liable because Mikes excursion was not within the scope of his employement

Front 27

Factors influencing wheater a servant is acting within the scope of employment include all but which?

Back 27

-act is similar to one principal authorized
-act is not seriously criminal
-act took place during hours that servant usually works
-ALL OF THE ABOVE

Front 28

Rosa was authorized to purchase a computer for Zebra Company. Needed written approval from VP if it cost more than 100,000. She bought 225,000 without approval.

Back 28

Zebra must honor the contract if it is reasonably believed that Rosa had the authority to purchase the equipment.

Front 29

If Zebra purchases the equipment

Back 29

it will be doing what it had to do, since Rosa had the apparent authority to buy the equipment

Front 30

Judy was the manager of an apt complex. She hired Rick to mow the lawns. One afternoon while Rick is mowing, his negligence caused damage to Terri's car. If Rick is an EMPLOYEE who is liable to terri

Back 30

The landlord and Rick

Front 31

If Rick is an independent contractor who is liable

Back 31

Only Rick

Front 32

If Judy had been negligent in hiring Rick, who is liable

Back 32

landlord, Judy, and Rick

Front 33

Joan agrees to try to negotiate the purchase of an acre of land for a prospective office building on behalf of Cheryl, who does not want to be identified to the seller. Joan tells the seller, "my FRIEND is interested in buying the alnd" if the seller contracts with Joan, Cheryl is

Back 33

an unidentified principal, and in case of a breach of contract Joan and Cheryl are jointly and severally liable

Front 34

The doctrine of respondeat superior

Back 34

applies to employees but not to independent contractors

Front 35

Jackie is an employee for Hardward Store Inc. When attempting to open a can of bright orange paint, she accidentally spills paint on Maggie, a customer. Maggie claims that her 800 suit is ruined. The legal liability here is described as

Back 35

Bothe the store and Jackie are liable to Maggie

Front 36

Chance is a traveling marketing rep for a publishing company. He is an independent contractor. When driving to a meeting he runs a stop sign and causes a crash. Judy is injured. Judy can

Back 36

hold Chance but not the company liable

Front 37

Which of the following statements is correct

Back 37

An employer is liable for the intentional misconduct of his employee if that employee was motivated, at least in part, by a desire to serve teh employer

Front 38

While at work one evening, Joe was confronted by Tim. Tim had come and accused Joe of stealing his gf. Joe stepped around the counter and hit Tim in the jaw. Tim was seriously injured and sued Joe and his employer for damages

Back 38

Joe, but not his employer, is probably liable to Tim

Front 39

Renee works for a restaurant. One morning she and other employees go for a fun run. She runs down someone wearing her company shirt. Runner claims Renne and company liable. most likely

Back 39

the court would consider wheater Renee was acting within the scope of her employment during the fun run

Front 40

An employer can be liable for

Back 40

-the negligent torts of his employee that cause physical harm to property
-the misrepresentation of his employee
-his employees defamatory statement
ALL THE ABOVE