a. What arguments would support Redi-Floors in recovering on the outstanding invoices from both Sonenberg and Manor Associates?

Category:

a. What arguments would support Redi-Floors in recovering on the outstanding invoices from both Sonenberg and Manor Associates?

0
0

Sonenberg Company managed Westchester Manor Apartments through its on-site property manager, Judith. Manor Associates Limited Partnership, whose general partner is Westchester Manor, Ltd., owned the complex. The entry sign to the property did not reveal the owner’s name but did disclose that Sonenberg managed the property. Judith contacted Redi-Floors and requested a proposal for installing carpet in several of the units. In preparing the proposal, Redi-Floors confirmed that Sonenberg was the managing company and that Judith was its on-site property manager. Sonenberg did not inform Redi-Floors of the owner’s identity. Judith and her assistant orally ordered the carpet, and Redi-Floors installed the carpet. Redi-Floors sent invoices to the complex and received checks from “Westchester Manor Apartments.” Believing that Sonenberg owned the complex, Redi-Floors did not learn of the true owner’s identity until after the work had been completed when a dispute arose concerning the payment of some of its invoices.
 
a. What arguments would support Redi-Floors in recovering on the outstanding invoices from both Sonenberg and Manor Associates?

b. What arguments would limit Redi-Floors to recovering on the outstanding invoices from either Sonenberg or Manor Associates?

c. Explain what the outcome would be under (1) the Second Restatement and (2) the Third Restatement.

Explanation & AnswerSolution by a verified expert

Explanation

Company RF may contend that Company S never revealed the name of Company MA. When the agent is working for an undisclosed principal, Company RF is entitled to a judgement against both the agent and the principal, upon the disclosure of the identity of the principal.
The principal and agent consented to determine their own responsibility. The two causes of action are not conflicting since the agent is liable because Company S made the contract, while the principal is liable because it caused the contract to be made.
Originally, because Company S negotiated the contract, the anonymous principal is liable for the deal because the anonymous principal benefits from the contract and because it is the anonymous principal's business that is carried out under Company S's supervision.

Verified Answer

Company RF canclaim that the name of Company MA was never revealed to Company RF by Company S. Company S,therefore, acted as an undisclosed principal and Company RF is entitled to a judgement against both the agent and the principal, upon the discovery of the identity of the principal.
Both the principal and the agent consent to the establishment of their own duty. There is no discrepancy between the two causes of action since the agent is responsible because they created the deal.

Explanation

Individual S and Company MA may contend that Company RF may either recover from Individual S or Company MA but not from both, even though Individual MA is an unknown principal.

Verified Answer

Individual S and Company MA may argue that Company RF can recover from either Individual S or Company MA but not from both, even if Individual MA is an undisclosed principal.

Explanation

The disclosure of a brand name by the agent and the recognition of that name by the complainant are not generally adequate to shield the agent from obligation.
An agent who concludes a contract without identifying the principal is individually liable for the contract. The burden is on agent to expose their agency, and not on the person with whom the agent is dealing with, if the agent wishes to avoid personal obligation.

Verified Answer

An agent who concludes a contract without recognizing its principal is personally responsible for the contract.
If the agent wants to escape personal responsibility, the obligation is on the agent to reveal its agency; the obligation to discover the trade name is not with the person with whom the agent is dealing with.

Purchase this answer to view it. $5
Login/Sign up for free, load your wallet instantly using PayPal or cards and purchase this solution to view it.


Get Help With Your Assignments

Place your order now and get a quality plagiarism-free paper via email.

Write My Paper For Me