× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
s
3
v
3
p
3
m
2
s
2
d
2
N
2
d
2
e
2
s
2
s
2
e
2
Home Q & A Board Other Fields Homework Help Business
New Topic  
lukax22 lukax22
wrote...
Go to Answer
Posts: 612
Rep: 0 0
6 years ago
In Griffith v. Clear Lakes Trout, Griffith grew trout for Clear Lakes; the parties got into a dispute over what were market size trout, as Clear Lakes wanted larger fish. The court held that:
 a. since both parties had agreed for 3 years that market size was 12 to 16 ounces, Clear Lakes was liable for breach of contract when it tried to change the definition of market size
  b. since there was no written definition of market size, Clear Lakes was not liable for breach of contract
  c. since there was a written contract specifying market size as 12 to 16 ounces, Clear Lakes was liable for breach of contract
  d. Griffith did not have a case because there was never a contract between the parties e. the parties' previous dealings were insufficient to show agreement
Read 73 times
1 Reply
Replies
Answer verified by a subject expert
syaarsyaar
wrote...
#1
Top Poster
Posts: 1166
Rep: 8 0
6 years ago
Sign in or Sign up in seconds to unlock everything for free
1

Related Topics

lukax22 Author
wrote...

6 years ago
Thanks
sleinhi
wrote...

Yesterday
Thanks for your help!!
Marctheshark
wrote...

2 hours ago
This calls for a celebration Person Raising Both Hands in Celebration
New Topic      
Quick Reply
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  1427 People Browsing
Start New Topic Take the Tour CoursesNew Study Tools Topics Trending Browse by Textbook
Live Chat
Related Images
  
 1625
  
 870
  
 1008
Your Opinion
Which 'study break' activity do you find most distracting?
Votes: 824
Previous poll results: Do you believe in global warming?