Ace - AI Tutor
Ask Our Educators
Textbooks
My Library
Flashcards
Scribe - AI Notes
Notes & Exams
Download App
Jenny J

Jenny J.

Divider

Viewed Questions

Cal-Cut had dealt with Idaho Pipe for years. Idaho Pipe requested 30,000 feet of steel pipe from CalCut. Cal-Cut sent written confirmation. Idaho Pipe accepted the offer by return mail, changed the delivery date from October 15 to December 15, and sent $$\$ 20,000$$ in partial payment. Cal-Cut confirmed the order and did not change the October 15 delivery date, but wrote, "We will work it out," on the contract. Cal-Cut delivered 12,937 feet of pipe before October 5, which Idaho Pipe accepted. Then Cal-Cut refused to deliver any more pipe. The sale had become unprofitable, as the price of pipe had risen quickly. Was this deal enforced? Could Idaho Pipe recover damages? [Southern Idaho Pipe and Steel v. Cal-Cut Pipe and Supply, 567 P.2d 1246, Sup. Ct. Id. (1977)]

The Legal Environment of Business

Questions asked

ANSWERED

Breanna Ollech verified

Numerade educator

In the case Board of Trustees of the State University of New York v. Fox, the Supreme Court discussed the test for judging commercial-speech regulation. Part of the test is: a. if the regulation has a "pernicious impact" on speech b. based on an inquiry into the intent of the U.S. Congress c. if the state has a substantial interest in the regulation balanced by the cost of the restriction d. balancing First Amendment rights against the overarching requirements of the Commerce Clause e. none of the other choices

View Answer
divider