A particularly important issue that has been raised is whether a person who acquires property after the institution of the regulatory regime should have any claim whatsoever. Some argue that such a landowner should not, having acquired the property knowing the restrictions to which it was subject and presumably at a price that reflected those restrictions. Others argue that to eliminate any such claim would enable government effectively to extinguish substantial value of the property without any recourse for the owner. The Supreme Court has concluded that the timing of the acquisition
Rationale or Reasoning All the essential terms were expressed in this agreement. It set the price, the down payment, the interest rate, the approximate closing date, the personal and real property to be sold, the governing law, and the earnest money deposit. The parties could have closed their deal with this contract. Therefore, we conclude that the circuit court erred in ruling that this agreement was
One, promises may act as consideration for some other but there are limitations, in that the value needs to be defined explicitly. Two, past consideration; if something happened in the past that did not establish some quasi-contract is cannot be currently exchanged for a promise. Consideration requires a current exchange. Third, some courts hold that relief from some moral obligation by the promisor is sufficient consideration and currently being exchanged. Fourth, the preexisting duty rule exerts that an action sufficient for reward will be not enforced if the action is already the duty of person performing the
According to IAS 17- paragraph 7, the classification of leases is based on the extent to which risks and rewards incidental to ownership of a leased asset lie with the lessor or the lessee. IAS 17-paragraph 8 also mentions that a lease is classified as an operating lease if it does not transfer substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership, while a finance lease is determined if it transfers substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership. 1. Based on the IAS 17-7 and IAS 17-8, the junior accountant's analysis was incorrect. The junior accountant interpreted the lease as an operating lease based on the fact that the equipment reverts to the lessor at the end of the lease.
The computer system cost $12,000 and is normally sold by Shabbona for $15,200. Shabbona uses a perpetual inventory system. 4. Truck #4 has a list price of $14,000. It is acquired in exchange for 1,000 shares of common stock in Shabbona Corporation.
The project will run for 10 years, the discount rate is 16%, and an initial investment of $2.1 million is required. The project has no salvage value at the end of 10 years. Ignore taxes. (a) What is the base case NPV? (b) Now, suppose that at the end of the ﬁrst year, the project can be dismantled and sold for $1.4 million.
Accounting 381 Winter 2010 Name ________________________________ Quiz 2: 15 points (1 point each) 1. Which of the following is an example of managing earnings down? a. Changing estimated bad debts from 3 percent to 2.5 percent of sales. b. Revising the estimated life of equipment from 10 years to 8 years.
See Kornbrodt v. Equitable Trust Co., 1931 Ore. LEXIS 203. If any term of a contract is not satisfied without legitimate cause, then there is a breach in the contract. As stated in Watts v. Ward, 1 Ore. 86 (Or. 1854), a finder has the right to hold lost property until the offered reward is paid to them. Bart offered a reward for the return of his property.
BE10-1 Kananga Company has these obligations at December 31: (a) a note payable for $100,000 due in 2 years – Yes, this is a long term liability. (b) a 10-year mortgage payable of $200,000 payable in ten $20,000 annual payments – No, this would be considered a liquidity. (c) interest payable of $15,000 on the mortgage – No, this would be a current