Joe and jack have a written contract whereby joe agrees to sell jack a plot of land for $100,000. later, without terminating the first contract, the parties modify the deal so that joe sells jack the same plot of land for $125,000. the second agreement is not a contract because: a. the first contract was not terminated. b. there is no consideration for jack's promise. c. joe's promise is illusory. d. written contracts for the sale of land cannot be modified.

How do primary and secondary industries differ

The following selected circumstances relate to pending lawsuits for erismus, inc. erismus’s fiscal year ends on december 31. financial statements are issued in march 2019. erismus prepares its financial statements according to u.s. gaap. required: indicate the amount erismus would record as an asset, liability, or not accrued in the following circumstances. 1. erismus is defending against a lawsuit. erismus's management believes the company has a slightly worse than 50/50 chance of eventually prevailing in court, and that if it loses, the judgment will be $1,000,000. 2. erismus is defending against a lawsuit. erismus's management believes it is probable that the company will lose in court. if it loses, management believes that damages could fall anywhere in the range of $2,000,000 to $4,000,000, with any damage in that range equally likely. 3. erismus is defending against a lawsuit. erismus's management believes it is probable that the company will lose in court. if it loses, management believes that damages will eventually be $5,000,000, with a present value of $3,500,000. 4. erismus is a plaintiff in a lawsuit. erismus's management believes it is probable that the company eventually will prevail in court, and that if it prevails, the judgment will be $1,000,000. 5. erismus is a plaintiff in a lawsuit. erismus’s management believes it is virtually certain that the company eventually will prevail in court, and that if it prevails, the judgment will be $500,000.

Gwen, a manager at exude apparels inc., received a message from a customer requesting a replacement for a purchased pair of shoes. exude apparels has a clearly stated no-return policy. gwen responded to the customer denying the request in a tactful and clear manner. despite this, the customer submitted a second request. in this scenario, which of the following is an appropriate response to the second request?