Clive and Bill Were Not Friends but Worked in the Same

question 1

Multiple Choice

Clive and Bill were not friends but worked in the same firm.Both worked with computers and had computers at home.They entered a contract in which Clive agreed to sell Bill his "Apple,printer,and a compatible word processing program for $3000." When Bill went to take delivery of the goods,he realized that there had been a great mistake.He thought Clive was selling his Apple Macintosh.By "Apple" Clive meant his Apple IIe.Furthermore,unknown to both of them at the time of the contract,the program disk had been destroyed by some coffee accidentally spilled on it by a friend of Clive's wife.Bill refused to go through with the deal.On these facts,which of the following is true if Clive sues Bill?

• A)This is an example of caveat emptor and the purchaser has no remedy.
• B)With regard to which computer is the subject matter of the contract,the court will determine which computer was meant to be sold by the seller and declare that one to be the subject matter of the sale.
• C)With regard to the program disk,since all elements of a contract exist (i.e.,offer,acceptance,consideration,etc.),Bill must pay for it.
• D)With regard to which computer is the subject matter of the sale,the court will examine which interpretation is the more reasonable; if they are equally reasonable,that part of the contract,at least,will be void.
• E)Since the parties to the contract have a different understanding as to the subject matter of the sale,they can ask the court for rectification,that is,for the court to rewrite the contract.

---

Definitions:

Body Dissatisfaction

A person's negative perception of the appearance of their own body, often leading to severe emotional distress and unhealthy behaviors.

Egocentrism

The incapacity to distinguish one's own viewpoint from that of another person.

Hypothetical Thinking

The cognitive process involved in formulating and considering imaginary or "what if" scenarios, not restrained by current reality.

Deductive Reasoning

The practice of deriving a conclusion from the unification of multiple assertions believed to be true.