Business Law Final Exam

1. George Walton, Sr., the sole owner of a small retailing business, was attempting to suffice a credit purchase of goods from a contact with whom he had not previously do business. While talking in person to the wholesalers representative, Mr. Walton pointed to his son, George-Boy (a famous musician who was home visiting his parents for a few days), and stated that my partner and I begin incessantly paid our bills on time. George-Boy saw and heard what his mystify had through and said, but made no comments in the strawman of the wholesalers representative. George-Boy later(prenominal) testifyed his pay off that he had no intention of take for granted indebtedness for any(prenominal) of his fathers debts. The wholesaler sold goods to Mr. Walton on credit, in assurance on the picture that Mr. Walton and the well-known George-Boy were partners. Mr. Walton failed to pay for the goods when payment was due. later various efforts to collect payment from Mr. Walton proved unsuccessful, the wholesaler sued Mr. Walton and George-Boy in an effort to collect the debt. Is George-Boy apt for the debt? Why or why not?Since George-Boy did not make any comments in the presence of the wholesaler?s representative, and the wholesaler relied on the feeling that George-Boy and Mr. Walton were partners, George-Boy is apt(p) for the debt.

The relevant legal principle is partnership by estoppel. infra this legal doctrine, a person can be liable as a partner even though no such partnership existed. It was not sufficient for George-Boy to inform his father that he had no intention of assuming lia bility for any of his father?s debts. For G! eorge-Boy to avoid liability, he would have had to withal inform the wholesaler of this decision. It is significant that the wholesaler relied on the notion that George-Boy and Mr. Walton... If you want to get a full essay, parliamentary constabulary it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay