[Defaulted Loan] Bruce wanted to open his own restaurant,The Burger Bar,and called his friend Janet for a loan.Janet orally agreed to loan Bruce $200,000.The agreement was not put into writing.Two years later,the loan was never repaid and is in default.The Burger Bar is bankrupt and Janet decides to sue Bruce in his individual capacity.
-If the reasoning of the case in the text,Athanasios Valsamis v.Néstor Gonzáles-Romero is followed,what would Janet have to prove in court?
A)Janet does not have to prove anything,as the burden would shift to Bruce to prove an agreement did not exist.
B)Janet must prove money is due and Bruce is the responsible party.
C)Janet must prove money is due.
D)Janet must prove money is due and The Burger Bar is the responsible party.
E)Janet must prove The Burger Bar is the responsible party.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)Since Janet is suing Bruce as an individual and not The Burger Bar,she must
prove $200,000 is due and Bruce in his individual capacity is the responsible party.
B)Since Janet is suing Bruce as an individual and not The Burger Bar,she must prove $200,000 is due and Bruce in his individual capacity is the responsible party.
C)Since Janet is suing Bruce as an individual and not The Burger Bar,she must prove $200,000 is due and Bruce in his individual capacity is the responsible party.
D)Since Janet is suing Bruce as an individual and not The Burger Bar,she must prove $200,000 is due and Bruce in his individual capacity is the responsible party.
E)Since Janet is suing Bruce as an individual and not The Burger Bar,she must prove $200,000 is due and Bruce in his individual capacity is the responsible party.

[Defaulted Loan] Bruce Wanted to Open His Own Restaurant,The Burger