Jones purchase the stock of Smithon outright leaving Smithon intact? The stock should not be purchase by Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones acquiring the assets, liabilities and also would inherit the contractual obligations of the selling corporation, would, be the results of the purchase. In lay terms, he has bought the existing Smithon Corporation and he is responsible of ensuring daily operations run efficiently but the tax aspect of acquisition he is responsible for existing and any future tax liabilities that the selling corporation had. It would be my advice for Mr. Jones to not buy the stock because of the liability of current and future tax obligations which Mr. Jones would incur from the purchase of the stock.
Explain. [Bannister v. Bemis Co. , 556 F.3d 882 (8th Cir.2009)] Case brief: Bemis Co, breached the covenant not to compete, the breach was material. Bannister could not accept employment with a Bemis competitor, but Bemis was to pay Bannister his salary. There was no term for a partial release. Bemis “released” Bannister to seek employment with one exception—Mondi Packaging.
(TCOs 3, 4, 5, & 7) Damien, not a dealer in real estate, sold real estate with a basis of $250,000 for $500,000 cash, a note for $250,000, and the buyer assumed Damien’s mortgage on the property of $125,000. During the year, the purchaser paid Damien $30,000 principal and
In 2013 the couple sold their house for $500,000 and bought a new house for $700,000 in cash. When they sold their house they paid 6% to the real estate agent which in total was $30,000 in fees. They file jointly and had joint ownership of the sold property. Research Issue Is the sale of the home in 2013 made by Mr. Junkiewicz and his wife a taxable transaction? Law and Analysis The taxpayer relief act of 1997 exempted from taxation the profits on the sale of a personal residence of up to $500,000 for married couples filing jointly and $250,000 for singles.
Leah Earp 1. Ronderos should win the lawsuit because the property was rightfully Schock’s already and Ronderos is not a merchant therefore the risk of loss is Schock’s. 6. The dealer cannot reclaim the automobile because the buy was a good faith purchaser and the dealer can only make a lawsuit against B. 10.
The contract for the IT system maintenance will be terminated immediately. III. Decision ARBITRATION DECISION April 30, 2012 In the Matter of: Sagle Electronics V. Rose Enterprises Sagle will not be granted the 10,000 Due to being 5 days past the 60 day completion date that was stated in the contract. The Damages that Rose is seeking in the amount of 40,000 will not be granted because the type of fiber Optics was not specified in the contract. The 3year contract for technical support will be terminated immediately due to clause 3 contract violation by
Unlike under unjust enrichment, however, a plaintiff can recover under quantum meruit even if he confers no benefit on the defendant. See, e.g., Barnes v. Lozoff, 20 Wis.2d 644, 123 N.W.2d 543 (Wis.1963) (allowing recovery for architect who created blueprints that were valueless to the defendant because defendant did not own some of the land at issue in the blueprints). Under quantum meruit, damages are “measured by the reasonable value of the plaintiff's services,” and calculated at “the customary rate of pay for such work in the community at the time the work was performed.” To take advantage of the more liberal recovery rule of quantum meruit, a plaintiff must prove two elements, both relating to the parties' course of conduct. As explained by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, to recover under quantum meruit, the plaintiff must prove that “the defendant requested the [plaintiff's] services” and “the plaintiff expected reasonable compensation” for the
b) Which of the above items are classified as For AGI and From AGI deductions? c) How would your answers to parts (a) and (b) change if Brandy were an employee rather than self-employed and none of the above expenditures were reimbursed by her employer? 7) On February 20, 2015, Charles, who is single and age 32, establishes a traditional deductible IRA and contributes $5,500 to the account. Charles’ AGI is $66,000 in 2014 and $57,000 in 2015. Charles is an active participant in his employer’s retirement plan.
[30] While the judge found sufficient merit in the antitrust claim to allow the case to continue, some independent observers doubt it can succeed, since Redbox "must show that the studios worked together as a cartel... There is little evidence of an industrywide conspiracy. "[25][29] In October 2009, 20th Century Fox and Warner Bros. filed motions to dismiss Redbox's lawsuits against them, with Fox arguing that "antitrust law does not require a seller to provide its product through the distribution channel that the buyer demands, on the date that the buyer demands, or at the price that the buyer demands,"[31] and Warner Bros. saying that "This is precisely the type of routine business dispute, motivated solely by a merchant’s attempt to protect its profits rather than to protect competition, that the antitrust laws are not meant to
Checkers Essay Richard Nixon gave this speech in an attempt to convince the American people that he should remain on the Republican ticket as the Vice Presidential candidate. At the time, he was the target of a smear campaign over the 18,000 dollars that he received. This was the first speech in which an American politician did not deny the claim against him or just completely ignore it. The speech did a good job of explaining Nixon’s argument as well as providing the American people with evidence of his position. Richard Nixon is a credible writer because he writes facts about himself and others that can be verified.