Keri went to Crandon's computer outlet with her brother Paul,who was buying a laser printer.While she was waiting for him,she saw a poster saying the store was collecting funds for a special computer for a student recently disabled in an accident.The seller induced Paul to buy the model "X" printer by stating as a fact that the printer could interface with his Macintosh clone.Paul paid $900 for the printer.Also,Keri gave $15 to the student fund after the seller confirmed he was collecting for the student's computer.Later Paul and Keri learned that neither statement was true-the printer didn't interface with Paul's computer and the store was doing nothing for the student-and that the seller didn't believe that either statement was true when he made them.Based on these facts,which of the following is true?
A) Keri could sue for damages due to a misunderstanding.
B) Paul could sue for damages due to an innocent misrepresentation.
C) Paul could sue for rescission because of the misrepresentation.
D) The court would rescind Paul's contract only with proof that the seller knew his statement was false.
E) Only Keri has a remedy because she had been fraudulently misrepresented.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Paul could sue for rescission because the seller induced him to make the purchase through a misrepresentation that turned out to be false. Rescission would allow Paul to cancel the contract and be compensated for the $900 he paid. Keri's $15 donation to the student fund is likely too small to give her standing to sue for fraud or any other remedy. The evidence does not suggest that the seller intentionally made false statements, so there is no need to prove that the seller knew the statements were false.

Keri Went to Crandon's Computer Outlet with Her Brother Paul,who