Clark, a movie producer, was allowed to work at a movie production company's offices (ITC) out of courtesy. His business card listed the ITC address and his phone calls were handled by ITC staff. In the office, he made a deal to produce a movie for another company. When problems developed and the company, presuming Clark worked for ITC, sued ITC. The court would be likely to hold that ITC:
a. ratified Clark's actions and so became liable for his actions
b. expressly accepted contracts negotiated by Clark, so was liable for the failure to perform c. had no liability because Clark merely was allowed to use office space at ITC
d. had no liability because Clark had no authority to represent ITC in movie decisions e. none of the other choices
a
You might also like to view...
In May Year 3, an auditor reissues the auditor's report on the Year 1 financial statements at a former client's request. The Year 1 financial statements are to be presented comparatively with subsequent audit statements. They are not restated, and the auditor does not revise the wording of the report. The auditor should
a. Dual-date the reissued report. b. Use the release date of the reissued report. c. Use the original report date on the reissued report. d. Use the current-period auditor's report date on the reissued report.
France considers a hostile environment as the only basis for sexual harassment claims
Indicate whether this statement is true or false.