978-1285770178 Lecture Note BL ComLaw 1e IM-Ch17 Part 1

subject Type Homework Help
subject Pages 17
subject Words 4933
subject Authors Roger LeRoy Miller

Unlock document.

This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
page-pf1
1
whole or in part.
page-pf2
2 INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL FOR BUSINESS LAW: COMMERCIAL LAW FOR ACCOUNTANTS
from all similar goods. Identification gives a buyer the right to obtain insurance on goods and the right to
the seller.
A. EXISTING GOODS
If a sale involves specific goods already in existence, identification occurs when the contract is made.
ANSWER TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTION IN THE FEATURE
INSIGHT INTO ETHICS
Why might marketing managers of large retail companies, particularly grocery chains, want to
purchase Fair Trade products? Increasingly, the buying public in the US and in Europe is willing to pay
slightly higher prices for fair trade certified coffee, cocoa, chocolate, tea, herbs, fresh fruit, sugar, rice, and
vanilla. Often, showing socially aware customers that a retail outlet is concerned about helping poor people in
other countries and encouraging sustainable growing practices will lead to higher sales.
C. GOODS THAT ARE PART OF A LARGER MASS
Problems may occur when goods exist in a larger mass, in which case identification can often be made
only by separating the goods from the mass. If owners hold fungible goods in common, title and risk can
pass without separation [UCC 2105(4)].
page-pf3
CHAPTER 17: TITLE, RISK, AND INSURABLE INTEREST 3
Testimony by Indy’s former vice president Vince Ballard was “inconclusive.” Ballard implied that Indy
delivered the cycle to Allen and asserted that Indy kept it in storage. But the cycle was found in Tena Allen’s
garage. This “strongly indicates that claimant delivered it to Allen.
..................................................................................................................................................
Notes and Questions
As in many cases, there may have been unstated reasons for the court’s decision against Indy in this
case. When asked whether Indy inquired into the occupations of its customers, the seller said no, because if it
did, it would likely lose half of them. In response to queries about the price of Allen’s custom cycle, Indy gave
different answers at different times. The seller was also not clear on how much the buyer still owed on the
price. When asked how long the cycle had been in storage, Indy provided a date that fell after the cycle had
been seized by law enforcement officers.
Is it ethical for the government to seize goods that arguably constitute the proceeds of a crime
even if those goods are not in the possession of the criminal? Yes. Ethics has to do with the fairness,
justness, rightness, or wrongness of action. A crime is illegal and generally unethicala crime is not fair to its
victims, whether they are individuals or society as a whole. It is just and fair, however, for the government to
seize goods that constitute the proceeds of a crime, regardless of whose possession they are in, so that the
“wrongness” of the crime can be made right.
ANSWER TO THE “WHAT IF THE FACTS WERE DIFFERENT?”
QUESTION IN CASE 17.1
Suppose that Indy had given the “Certificate of Origin” to Allen and had kept the motorcycle.
Would the result have been different? Explain. Possibly not. That goods have not been delivered to the
buyer can be determinative that title has not passed. In the context of this case, however, Indy might still have
had to prove its ownership of the cycle. If the company were no more successful in proving ownership; even
with the cycle in its possession, than the company was in the actual case, the result might have been the
same. But evidence that Allen had not paid for the cycle, coupled with Indy’s possession of it, would certainly
have leant support to Indy’s claim. If the court had viewed these circumstances as a sufficient indication that
title had not passed, the result might have been different.
ANSWER TO “THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT DIMENSION
QUESTION IN CASE 17.1
Should the passage of title be tied so closely to the possession of the goods? Discuss. Yes.
Before the creation of the UCC, titlethe right of ownershipwas the central concept in sales law, controlling
all of the issues of rights and remedies of the parties to a sales contract. There are numerous problems with
this concept, however, making it difficult to predict and determine which party had title and when. The UCC
divorced the question of title as completely as possible from the question of the rights and obligations of the
parties, replacing the concept in most situations with the concepts of identification, risk of loss, and insurable
page-pf4
whole or in part.
interest. The concept of title is still relevant but its passage is tied to the possession of the goodsonce the
seller has relinquished possession of sold goods, the buyer has them, and the parties expect no further action
by the seller, the buyer also has title. The UCC allows the parties to “otherwise explicitly agree.” This provides
for the parties to create their own rule to pass title. The UCC rules apply only if they do not otherwise agree.
ADDITIONAL CASES ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE
Other cases involving the passage of title in a sales contract include the following:
Usinor Industeel v. Leeco Steel Products, Inc., 209 F.Supp.2d 880 (N.D.Ill. 2002) (title passed to the
buyer at the time and place at which the seller physically delivered the goodssteel—despite the seller’s
reservation, in their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Arcadia Financial, Ltd. v. Southwest-Tex Leasing Co., 78 S.W.3d 619 (Tex.App.Austin 2002) (title to
motor vehicles did not pass to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods because the parties had agreed
that transfer of title was contingent on the seller’s receipt of payment).
In re Pro Page Partners, LLC, 270 Bankr. 221 (E.D.Tenn. 2001) (title passed to the buyer at the time and
place at which the seller physically delivered the goodsoffice equipment—despite the seller’s reservation, in
their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Right Touch of Class, Inc. v. Superior Bank, FSB, 536 S.E.2d 181 (Ga.App. 2000) (title to motor vehicle
passed to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between used-car dealers for the express
purpose of the vehicle’s resale to a third party).
Concord General Mutual Insurance Co. v. Sumner, 762 A.2d 849 (Vt. 2000) (title to motor vehicle passed
to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between dealers).
A. SHIPMENT AND DESTINATION CONTRACTS
Under a shipment contract, title passes at the time and place of shipment. Under a destination contract,
title passes when goods are tendered at the destination.
2. When a Title Document Is Not Required
When a buyer is to pick up goods and a document of title is not required, title passes at the time
and place of contracting, if the goods have been identified; if they have not, title passes on
identification [UCC 2401(3)].
page-pf5
page-pf6
whole or in part.
page-pf7
CHAPTER 17: TITLE, RISK, AND INSURABLE INTEREST 7
whole or in part.
ADDITIONAL CASES ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE
Other cases involving the passage of title in a sales contract include the following:
Usinor Industeel v. Leeco Steel Products, Inc., 209 F.Supp.2d 880 (N.D.Ill. 2002) (title passed to the
buyer at the time and place at which the seller physically delivered the goodssteel—despite the seller’s
reservation, in their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Arcadia Financial, Ltd. v. Southwest-Tex Leasing Co., 78 S.W.3d 619 (Tex.App.Austin 2002) (title to
motor vehicles did not pass to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods because the parties had agreed
that transfer of title was contingent on the seller’s receipt of payment).
In re Pro Page Partners, LLC, 270 Bankr. 221 (E.D.Tenn. 2001) (title passed to the buyer at the time and
place at which the seller physically delivered the goodsoffice equipment—despite the seller’s reservation, in
their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Right Touch of Class, Inc. v. Superior Bank, FSB, 536 S.E.2d 181 (Ga.App. 2000) (title to motor vehicle
passed to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between used-car dealers for the express
purpose of the vehicle’s resale to a third party).
Concord General Mutual Insurance Co. v. Sumner, 762 A.2d 849 (Vt. 2000) (title to motor vehicle passed
to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between dealers).
By agreement, parties can generally control when risk of loss passes from seller to buyer.
CASE SYNOPSIS
Case 17.3: Person v. Bowman
Tammy Herring and Stacy Bowman signed a document titled “Bill of Sale—Purchase Agreement” that
required Herring to pay $2,200 for a horse named Toby. Until the price was paid in full, the document required
Herring to board Toby at Bowman’s Summit Stables in Puyallup, Washington. Bowman would provide Toby’s
registration papers to Herring only when she paid in full. Before the price was paid, Tammy’s minor daughter,
Alex, was driving a buggy drawn by Toby when the horse reared and threw its passenger Diana Person from
the buggy. To recover for her injuries, Person filed a suit in a Wisconsin state court against Bowman, claiming
that Bowman owned the horse. The court ruled that Herring owned the horse. Person appealed.
A state intermediate appellate court affirmed. While Herring’s subjective belief may have been that she
did not own Toby and that this was a lease-like agreement, the parties’ objective manifestations are
consistent with this being a sale not a lease.”
..................................................................................................................................................
page-pf8
Notes and Questions
Risk of loss does not necessarily pass with title. If the parties to a contract do not specify when
the risk of loss passes, and the goods are to be delivered without their movement by the seller, when
does the risk pass? If the seller holds the goods and is a merchant, the risk of loss passes to the buyer
when the buyer takes physical possession of the goods. If the seller holds the goods and is not a merchant,
the risk of loss passes to the buyer on tender of delivery. When a bailee is holding the goods, the risk of loss
passes to the buyer when (1) the buyer receives a negotiable document of title for the goods, (2) the bailee
acknowledges the buyer’s right to possess the goods, or (3) the buyer receives a nonnegotiable document of
title and has had a reasonable time to present the document to the bailee and demand the goods. Which of
these situations existed in this case? Arguably, Stacy Bowman was a merchant, and the court ruled that
Tammy Herring was a buyer (not a lessee). In that case, the risk of loss passed to Herring when she took
physical possession of Toby. If Bowman did not qualify as a merchant, then Herring took the risk on
Bowman’s tender of the horse.
page-pf9
whole or in part.
page-pfa
whole or in part.
The buyer receives a nonnegotiable document of title and has had a reasonable time to
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND
Delivery and Bills of Lading
When a seller, a buyer, and the goods that serve as the subject of their contract are located in the same
city, delivery does not present many problems. The buyer will pick up the goods, or the seller will deliver
them.
In many transactions, however, the seller, the buyer, and the goods are located in different cities.
Distance can complicate an otherwise simple transaction. The parties may agree in their contract as to which
party will make delivery arrangements and who will pay the costs. This can be stated in delivery terms in the
parties’ contract. If the parties do not expressly agree as to delivery obligations, the UCC will control. (Under
the UCC, usage of trade, course of dealing, or course of performance may be applicable. Otherwise, specific
UCC provisions concerning delivery will apply [UCC 2307, 2308, 2309, 2504].)
Most sellers are not in the delivery business. Generally, a seller uses independent, common carriers
(trucking companies, shipping companies, railroads, airlines) to deliver goods. When a carrier receives goods
from a seller, the carrier issues a bill of lading to the seller. On the bill, the seller is usually identified as the
shipper (or consignor) and the buyer is named as the consignee. A bill of lading serves as the seller’s receipt
and as the contract between the seller and the carrier for transportation of the goods.
There are two forms of bills of ladingnegotiable bills and nonnegotiable bills. Negotiable bills (or order
bills) are easily recognizable. On a negotiable bill, goods are consigned to the order of a party (usually the
buyer). Typically, a negotiable bill specifies that “[s]urrender of this original order bill of lading properly
indorsed is required prior to delivery of the property.” A negotiable bill is normally printed on yellow paper. If
goods are shipped under a negotiable bill, a carrier does not give the goods to the buyer until the original
copy of the negotiable bill is presented to the carrier. A carrier that delivers goods to a party without insisting
on the surrender of the original copy of the negotiable bill may be held to have converted the goods and will
be liable to the holder of the negotiable bill [UCC 7403]. To prevent this, the seller must deliver the original
copy of the negotiable bill to the buyer before the buyer can obtain the goods from the carrier.
Most deliveries are made under nonnegotiable bills of lading. A nonnegotiable bill (or straight bill) is also
easily recognizable. Normally, somewhere on the nonnegotiable bill is printed the words “straight bill of
lading.” On a nonnegotiable bill, goods are simply consigned to a party (rather than consigned to the order of
a party). A nonnegotiable bill is usually printed on white paper. If goods are delivered under a nonnegotiable
bill, the carrier will turn the goods over to the named consignee (normally the buyer) without insisting on sur-
render of the original copy of the bill. Sellers often send nonnegotiable bills to buyers anyway. It is an easy
way to fulfill the UCC’s notice requirement. (Under the circumstances described in UCC 2504, a seller must
“promptly notify the buyer of [a] shipment.”) Also, the buyer might need the bill to file a claim against the
carrier if the goods are lost.
2 INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL FOR BUSINESS LAW: COMMERCIAL LAW FOR ACCOUNTANTS
from all similar goods. Identification gives a buyer the right to obtain insurance on goods and the right to
the seller.
A. EXISTING GOODS
If a sale involves specific goods already in existence, identification occurs when the contract is made.
ANSWER TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTION IN THE FEATURE
INSIGHT INTO ETHICS
Why might marketing managers of large retail companies, particularly grocery chains, want to
purchase Fair Trade products? Increasingly, the buying public in the US and in Europe is willing to pay
slightly higher prices for fair trade certified coffee, cocoa, chocolate, tea, herbs, fresh fruit, sugar, rice, and
vanilla. Often, showing socially aware customers that a retail outlet is concerned about helping poor people in
other countries and encouraging sustainable growing practices will lead to higher sales.
C. GOODS THAT ARE PART OF A LARGER MASS
Problems may occur when goods exist in a larger mass, in which case identification can often be made
only by separating the goods from the mass. If owners hold fungible goods in common, title and risk can
pass without separation [UCC 2105(4)].
CHAPTER 17: TITLE, RISK, AND INSURABLE INTEREST 3
Testimony by Indy’s former vice president Vince Ballard was “inconclusive.” Ballard implied that Indy
delivered the cycle to Allen and asserted that Indy kept it in storage. But the cycle was found in Tena Allen’s
garage. This “strongly indicates that claimant delivered it to Allen.
..................................................................................................................................................
Notes and Questions
As in many cases, there may have been unstated reasons for the court’s decision against Indy in this
case. When asked whether Indy inquired into the occupations of its customers, the seller said no, because if it
did, it would likely lose half of them. In response to queries about the price of Allen’s custom cycle, Indy gave
different answers at different times. The seller was also not clear on how much the buyer still owed on the
price. When asked how long the cycle had been in storage, Indy provided a date that fell after the cycle had
been seized by law enforcement officers.
Is it ethical for the government to seize goods that arguably constitute the proceeds of a crime
even if those goods are not in the possession of the criminal? Yes. Ethics has to do with the fairness,
justness, rightness, or wrongness of action. A crime is illegal and generally unethicala crime is not fair to its
victims, whether they are individuals or society as a whole. It is just and fair, however, for the government to
seize goods that constitute the proceeds of a crime, regardless of whose possession they are in, so that the
“wrongness” of the crime can be made right.
ANSWER TO THE “WHAT IF THE FACTS WERE DIFFERENT?”
QUESTION IN CASE 17.1
Suppose that Indy had given the “Certificate of Origin” to Allen and had kept the motorcycle.
Would the result have been different? Explain. Possibly not. That goods have not been delivered to the
buyer can be determinative that title has not passed. In the context of this case, however, Indy might still have
had to prove its ownership of the cycle. If the company were no more successful in proving ownership; even
with the cycle in its possession, than the company was in the actual case, the result might have been the
same. But evidence that Allen had not paid for the cycle, coupled with Indy’s possession of it, would certainly
have leant support to Indy’s claim. If the court had viewed these circumstances as a sufficient indication that
title had not passed, the result might have been different.
ANSWER TO “THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT DIMENSION
QUESTION IN CASE 17.1
Should the passage of title be tied so closely to the possession of the goods? Discuss. Yes.
Before the creation of the UCC, titlethe right of ownershipwas the central concept in sales law, controlling
all of the issues of rights and remedies of the parties to a sales contract. There are numerous problems with
this concept, however, making it difficult to predict and determine which party had title and when. The UCC
divorced the question of title as completely as possible from the question of the rights and obligations of the
parties, replacing the concept in most situations with the concepts of identification, risk of loss, and insurable
whole or in part.
interest. The concept of title is still relevant but its passage is tied to the possession of the goodsonce the
seller has relinquished possession of sold goods, the buyer has them, and the parties expect no further action
by the seller, the buyer also has title. The UCC allows the parties to “otherwise explicitly agree.” This provides
for the parties to create their own rule to pass title. The UCC rules apply only if they do not otherwise agree.
ADDITIONAL CASES ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE
Other cases involving the passage of title in a sales contract include the following:
Usinor Industeel v. Leeco Steel Products, Inc., 209 F.Supp.2d 880 (N.D.Ill. 2002) (title passed to the
buyer at the time and place at which the seller physically delivered the goodssteel—despite the seller’s
reservation, in their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Arcadia Financial, Ltd. v. Southwest-Tex Leasing Co., 78 S.W.3d 619 (Tex.App.Austin 2002) (title to
motor vehicles did not pass to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods because the parties had agreed
that transfer of title was contingent on the seller’s receipt of payment).
In re Pro Page Partners, LLC, 270 Bankr. 221 (E.D.Tenn. 2001) (title passed to the buyer at the time and
place at which the seller physically delivered the goodsoffice equipment—despite the seller’s reservation, in
their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Right Touch of Class, Inc. v. Superior Bank, FSB, 536 S.E.2d 181 (Ga.App. 2000) (title to motor vehicle
passed to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between used-car dealers for the express
purpose of the vehicle’s resale to a third party).
Concord General Mutual Insurance Co. v. Sumner, 762 A.2d 849 (Vt. 2000) (title to motor vehicle passed
to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between dealers).
A. SHIPMENT AND DESTINATION CONTRACTS
Under a shipment contract, title passes at the time and place of shipment. Under a destination contract,
title passes when goods are tendered at the destination.
2. When a Title Document Is Not Required
When a buyer is to pick up goods and a document of title is not required, title passes at the time
and place of contracting, if the goods have been identified; if they have not, title passes on
identification [UCC 2401(3)].
whole or in part.
CHAPTER 17: TITLE, RISK, AND INSURABLE INTEREST 7
whole or in part.
ADDITIONAL CASES ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE
Other cases involving the passage of title in a sales contract include the following:
Usinor Industeel v. Leeco Steel Products, Inc., 209 F.Supp.2d 880 (N.D.Ill. 2002) (title passed to the
buyer at the time and place at which the seller physically delivered the goodssteel—despite the seller’s
reservation, in their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Arcadia Financial, Ltd. v. Southwest-Tex Leasing Co., 78 S.W.3d 619 (Tex.App.Austin 2002) (title to
motor vehicles did not pass to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods because the parties had agreed
that transfer of title was contingent on the seller’s receipt of payment).
In re Pro Page Partners, LLC, 270 Bankr. 221 (E.D.Tenn. 2001) (title passed to the buyer at the time and
place at which the seller physically delivered the goodsoffice equipment—despite the seller’s reservation, in
their contract, of a security interest in the goods).
Right Touch of Class, Inc. v. Superior Bank, FSB, 536 S.E.2d 181 (Ga.App. 2000) (title to motor vehicle
passed to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between used-car dealers for the express
purpose of the vehicle’s resale to a third party).
Concord General Mutual Insurance Co. v. Sumner, 762 A.2d 849 (Vt. 2000) (title to motor vehicle passed
to the buyer on the physical delivery of the goods in a sale between dealers).
By agreement, parties can generally control when risk of loss passes from seller to buyer.
CASE SYNOPSIS
Case 17.3: Person v. Bowman
Tammy Herring and Stacy Bowman signed a document titled “Bill of Sale—Purchase Agreement” that
required Herring to pay $2,200 for a horse named Toby. Until the price was paid in full, the document required
Herring to board Toby at Bowman’s Summit Stables in Puyallup, Washington. Bowman would provide Toby’s
registration papers to Herring only when she paid in full. Before the price was paid, Tammy’s minor daughter,
Alex, was driving a buggy drawn by Toby when the horse reared and threw its passenger Diana Person from
the buggy. To recover for her injuries, Person filed a suit in a Wisconsin state court against Bowman, claiming
that Bowman owned the horse. The court ruled that Herring owned the horse. Person appealed.
A state intermediate appellate court affirmed. While Herring’s subjective belief may have been that she
did not own Toby and that this was a lease-like agreement, the parties’ objective manifestations are
consistent with this being a sale not a lease.”
..................................................................................................................................................
Notes and Questions
Risk of loss does not necessarily pass with title. If the parties to a contract do not specify when
the risk of loss passes, and the goods are to be delivered without their movement by the seller, when
does the risk pass? If the seller holds the goods and is a merchant, the risk of loss passes to the buyer
when the buyer takes physical possession of the goods. If the seller holds the goods and is not a merchant,
the risk of loss passes to the buyer on tender of delivery. When a bailee is holding the goods, the risk of loss
passes to the buyer when (1) the buyer receives a negotiable document of title for the goods, (2) the bailee
acknowledges the buyer’s right to possess the goods, or (3) the buyer receives a nonnegotiable document of
title and has had a reasonable time to present the document to the bailee and demand the goods. Which of
these situations existed in this case? Arguably, Stacy Bowman was a merchant, and the court ruled that
Tammy Herring was a buyer (not a lessee). In that case, the risk of loss passed to Herring when she took
physical possession of Toby. If Bowman did not qualify as a merchant, then Herring took the risk on
Bowman’s tender of the horse.
whole or in part.
whole or in part.
The buyer receives a nonnegotiable document of title and has had a reasonable time to
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND
Delivery and Bills of Lading
When a seller, a buyer, and the goods that serve as the subject of their contract are located in the same
city, delivery does not present many problems. The buyer will pick up the goods, or the seller will deliver
them.
In many transactions, however, the seller, the buyer, and the goods are located in different cities.
Distance can complicate an otherwise simple transaction. The parties may agree in their contract as to which
party will make delivery arrangements and who will pay the costs. This can be stated in delivery terms in the
parties’ contract. If the parties do not expressly agree as to delivery obligations, the UCC will control. (Under
the UCC, usage of trade, course of dealing, or course of performance may be applicable. Otherwise, specific
UCC provisions concerning delivery will apply [UCC 2307, 2308, 2309, 2504].)
Most sellers are not in the delivery business. Generally, a seller uses independent, common carriers
(trucking companies, shipping companies, railroads, airlines) to deliver goods. When a carrier receives goods
from a seller, the carrier issues a bill of lading to the seller. On the bill, the seller is usually identified as the
shipper (or consignor) and the buyer is named as the consignee. A bill of lading serves as the seller’s receipt
and as the contract between the seller and the carrier for transportation of the goods.
There are two forms of bills of ladingnegotiable bills and nonnegotiable bills. Negotiable bills (or order
bills) are easily recognizable. On a negotiable bill, goods are consigned to the order of a party (usually the
buyer). Typically, a negotiable bill specifies that “[s]urrender of this original order bill of lading properly
indorsed is required prior to delivery of the property.” A negotiable bill is normally printed on yellow paper. If
goods are shipped under a negotiable bill, a carrier does not give the goods to the buyer until the original
copy of the negotiable bill is presented to the carrier. A carrier that delivers goods to a party without insisting
on the surrender of the original copy of the negotiable bill may be held to have converted the goods and will
be liable to the holder of the negotiable bill [UCC 7403]. To prevent this, the seller must deliver the original
copy of the negotiable bill to the buyer before the buyer can obtain the goods from the carrier.
Most deliveries are made under nonnegotiable bills of lading. A nonnegotiable bill (or straight bill) is also
easily recognizable. Normally, somewhere on the nonnegotiable bill is printed the words “straight bill of
lading.” On a nonnegotiable bill, goods are simply consigned to a party (rather than consigned to the order of
a party). A nonnegotiable bill is usually printed on white paper. If goods are delivered under a nonnegotiable
bill, the carrier will turn the goods over to the named consignee (normally the buyer) without insisting on sur-
render of the original copy of the bill. Sellers often send nonnegotiable bills to buyers anyway. It is an easy
way to fulfill the UCC’s notice requirement. (Under the circumstances described in UCC 2504, a seller must
“promptly notify the buyer of [a] shipment.”) Also, the buyer might need the bill to file a claim against the
carrier if the goods are lost.

Trusted by Thousands of
Students

Here are what students say about us.

Copyright ©2022 All rights reserved. | CoursePaper is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university.