Fianal paper

Submitted By martasz97
Words: 787
Pages: 4

BUS 110
Final Exam

1. Sole proprietorship is a form of business in which the owner is actually the business; the business is not a separate legal entity. Characteristic element of the conduct of individual business is full responsibility of the owner. Wells Fargo sued Barry Constantine d/b/a The Scone Stone because they stopped received payments on the loan, which means that Mr. Constantine is personally liable for the Debt, because he is fully responsible for a company. He creates this company, so he is The Scone Stone, only he might be responsible for its debts. If Barry is unable to fulfill the debt using business assets, Wells Fargo can go after his personal property to fulfill the debt. This may include his personal bank monies, his automobile, or even his home. This means that a person operating a business, for the liabilities resulting from the corresponding all its assets, even private. In the case of this form of business is not on the delimitation of the company's assets and personal property of its owner. The company’s creditors (Walls Fargo) may enforce their claims from the assets of both, company and private entrepreneurs. What's more personal creditors from bank, in which the entrepreneur contracted a loan for his business, even in the absence of repayment, may assert their claims not only from the company assets, but also from a private savings. Responsibility of the entire property is not limited to property acquired during the business activity, but is also a reference to the assets accumulated before the start of operations.

2. For most contracts, the general rule is that while it's not illegal to enter into a contract with a minor, the contract is voidable at the discretion of the minor, like in this case Jennifer who is twelve years old. Voidable contract is a contract in which at least one party has the option to void his or her contractual obligations. If the contract is voided, both parties are released from their obligations under the contract. Phillies’ team representative enters into a contract with Jennifer, a minor, to exchange the valuable ball for one that was worth only $100, and some cotton candy. This is voidable contract because Jennifer can get out the contract because she is a minor, but Phillies cannot. Also, to protect minors, the law recognizes the infancy doctrine, which gives minors the right to disaffirm most contracts they have entered into with adults. If a minor has transferred consideration- in this case historic and valuable ball- to a competent party before disaffirming the contract, that party- Phillies- must place the minor in status quo. That is, Jennifer must be restored to the same position she was before she entered into the contract. Restoration is usually done by returning the consideration to the minor, and minor is obligated to return the goods she has received from the Phillies.
Jennifer should win this case, because as I mentioned before, when she entered into contract she…