The owner of a new office building contracted with a well-known landscaper to design and install landscaping around the building for $30,000. The agreement was memorialized in writing, was signed by both parties, and called for a budget of $5,000 for trees, shrubs, sod, and materials. The contract required the landscaper to complete the work within six months. Due to an unexpected increase in the price of trees and shrubs, the landscaper abandoned the project and never completed any of the work.Three years after the landscaper's deadline, the building owner sued the landscaper for breach of contract. In the jurisdiction, the statute of limitations for breach of a services contract is two years after the breach, and the statute of limitations for breach of a sale-of-goods contract is four years.Can the owner recover damages from the landscaper? A. No, because the contract is divisible with respect to the services and goods, and the landscaper's breach is therefore subject to the two-year statute of limitations. B. No, because the contract primarily calls for services, and the landscaper's breach is therefore subject to the two-year statute of limitations. C. Yes, because the landscaper's breach was a result of an increase in the price of goods, and his breach is therefore subject to the four-year statute of limitations. D. Yes, because the landscaper's breach was willful, and he is therefore estopped from denying that his breach is subject to the four-year statute of limitations.

On March 1, 2027, Sheridan Company acquired real estate, on which it planned to construct a small office building, by paying $83,500 in cash. An old warehouse on the property was demolished at a cost of $8,900; the salvaged materials were sold for $1,840. Additional expenditures before construction began included $1,340 attorney’s fee for work concerning the land purchase, $4,850 real estate broker’s fee, $8,840 architect’s fee, and $14,700 to put in driveways and a parking lot.(a)Determine the amount to be reported as the cost of the land.Cost of land $

Chris, a carpenter, entered into a contract with Doug for the construction of a garage on Doug’s property for $5,000. Chris had constructed all of the garage, except the door, when he refused to complete the contract. Chris has substantially performed his part of the agreement, and would be entitled to payment of the contract price, less the amount necessary to finish the building.Group of answer choicesfalsetrueNext

When Myrtle comes home from work one evening, she finds that her yard has been mowed and trimmed. Later, a man comes to collect for the yard work done. Myrtle refuses to pay for the work since she has never seen the man before and did not hire him to do her yard work. Which of the following answers is most accurate?a.Myrtle would not have to pay for the yard work.b.This is an implied, unilateral contract and she must pay the price requested by the man.c.The court would order Myrtle to pay the reasonable value of the yard work because of the benefit conferred on her.d.This is an express, voidable contract that either party may avoid.

Carpet Woes. Beau went shopping at ABC Carpet. He saw some carpet he liked but could not make up his mind. The manager at ABC Carpet wrote down the proposed purchase price for him along with a statement that the price would be good for three months. Two months later Beau went back to ABC Carpet to purchase the carpet. Unfortunately, the price had gone up. Beau showed the manager his writing and guaranteed price, but the manager said that the offer was no longer good. Although he had to pay more than the ABC manager had initially promised, Beau proceeded to purchase his carpet from ABC Carpet, and he also contracted with ABC to do the installation. Unfortunately, Beau almost immediately started to have problems with the carpet. Beau told the sales manager of ABC Carpet that he was planning on bringing suit for breach of warranty. The sales manager, however, told him that the breach of warranty provisions only applied to sales of goods and that the carpet purchase was for installation, a service. Which of the following is true regarding whether the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) applies to the contract Beau had with ABC Carpet?Multiple ChoiceCommon law applies, not the UCC, because the contract involves a mixed sale.The UCC applies, not common law, because the contract involves a mixed sale.The court will determine if the predominant purpose of the contract was for the sale of goods, and if it was, the UCC applies.The court will apply the "service-warranty" test to determine if the predominant purpose of the contract was for the provision of a service, and if it was, the UCC applies.The court will apply the "service-warranty" test to determine if the predominant purpose of the contract was for the sale of goods, and if it was, the UCC applies.

Pinewood Company purchased two buildings on four acres of land. The lump-sum purchase price was $2,400,000. According to independent appraisals, the fair values were $1,125,000 (building A) and $500,000 (building B) for the buildings and $875,000 for the land.Required:Determine the initial valuation of the buildings and the land.