× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
5
k
4
c
4
4
M
3
t
3
i
3
B
3
k
3
m
3
c
3
o
3
Home Q & A Board Humanities Legal Studies
New Topic  
aubree98 aubree98
wrote...
Go to Answer
Posts: 316
Rep: 0 0
6 years ago
Accord and Satisfaction. Kowalsky, a contractor, was required to make periodic payments to a union pension fund administered by Kelly, trustee for the union. Kowalsky and Kelly disagreed over the amount of money Kowalsky owed the union. After a number of heated discussions Kowalsky sent Kelly four checks totaling 8,500 and enclosed them in a letter saying: These checks are tendered with the understanding that they are full payment of all claims against Kowalsky. Immediately after receiving the checks, Kelly called Kowalsky and told him the checks were not going to be cashed but would simply be held and that Kowalsky still owed Kelly money because the 8,500 did not cover late charges on the deposited payments. Kowalsky did not ask for the return of the checks or stop payment. Kelly retained, but did not cash, the checks and sued Kowalsky for the late charges. Kowalsky claimed that retention of the checks constituted full accord and satisfaction of the debt. Who won, and why?
Read 176 times
1 Reply
Replies
Answer verified by a subject expert
MacdonaldcMacdonaldc
wrote...
#1
Top Poster
Posts: 1184
Rep: 8 0
6 years ago
Sign in or Sign up in seconds to unlock everything for free
1

Related Topics

aubree98 Author
wrote...

6 years ago
Brilliant ツ
Alina01978
wrote...

Yesterday
You make an excellent tutor!
avance37
wrote...

2 hours ago
This site is awesome
New Topic      
Quick Reply
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  841 People Browsing
Start New Topic Take the Tour CoursesNew Study Tools Topics Trending Browse by Textbook
Live Chat
Related Images
  
 1670
  
 333
  
 311