Question

haskins is an officer of a real estate development firm and purchased a piece of property in a rural area of arizona with the idea of building resort homes there. the firm has always had board resolutions for entering into contract for the purchases of property (as is common practice), but there was no resolution for this property purchase. only haskins's name is on the contract, with no reference to the company. which of the following statements is true? a. haskins is personally liable for the contract. b. the company is personally liable for the contract. c. both haskins and the company are personally liable for the contract. d. neither haskins nor his company are liable for the contract.

Answer 1

Haskins is personally liable for the contract because only his name is on the contract and there was no board resolution authorizing the purchase, which is necessary for the company to be liable.

Therefore, the correct answer would be a. Haskins is personally liable for the contract.

Step-by-step explanation:

In the scenario where Haskins, an officer of a real estate development firm, purchased property without a board resolution and with only his name on the contract, the question of liability arises. Given that there was no reference to the company on the contract and the firm typically requires board resolutions for property purchases, it appears that Haskins acted independently and did not bind the company to the contract.

Therefore, the correct answer would be a. Haskins is personally liable for the contract. Since the company's name is not on the contract and there was no board resolution authorizing the purchase, the company would not be held liable for the contract. More specifically, the answer focus on the concept of authority in contract law. If an agent, like Haskins, does not have the authority to act on behalf of the company, or if the agent's actions are not ratified by the company, then the agent may be personally liable.