On January 15, 1990, Anders brought an action against Barnes for breach of a contract for the sale of electronic parts. The breach occurred on January 10, 1986, and Anders discovered the breach on January 20, 1986. The state statute of limitations for contract actions is five years. Barnes raised the UCC statute of limitations as a defense to the action. DISCUSS, Is this defense valid? WHY 0R WHY NOT...WHAT ARE THE LEGAL ISSUES?

Question

yxvngJawn1022 yxvngJawn1022

07-05-2020
Law

contestada

On January 15, 1990, Anders brought an action against Barnes for breach of a contract for the sale of electronic parts. The breach occurred on January 10, 1986, and Anders discovered the breach on January 20, 1986. The state statute of limitations for contract actions is five years. Barnes raised the UCC statute of limitations as a defense to the action. DISCUSS, Is this defense valid? WHY 0R WHY NOT...WHAT ARE THE LEGAL ISSUES?

Respuesta :

Otras preguntas

Why do electrons rather than protons make up the flow of charge in a metal wire?

How to write 12.87 minutes as a fractional number

Which statement about the function below is TRUE? A. It is increasing between x = –2 and x = 1. B. It is increasing between x = 2 and x = 3. C. It is increasing

How does one recognize the highest occupied energy level??

What kind of ion may serve as a cofactor to catalyze a reaction. It's #5 in the picture

A dance floor is made from square wooden tiles with a side length of 1 foot. The floor can be laid out as a square or as a rectangle. Yeasmin chooses a rectangu

Probably the main reason Africans, rather than Native Americans, became slaves in America was that

Describe how to properly measure the volume of a liquid.

Probably the main reason Africans, rather than Native Americans, became slaves in America was that

What is the definition of the term 'clone'?

akachimichael akachimichael · Answer 1 · 2020-05-11T11:08:24+02:00

ANSWER: The defence is not valid, because the time for any state status of limitations for contract action starts when all facts about the breach has been found, and it has been concluded that a breach of contract actually happened. The time does not start when the breach happened, but when facts has been generated to show that a breach actually happened.

The plaintiff actually have more 5 days to file his case because the fact about the breach was known on the 20th of January, 1986 and his case is filed in the court on 15th of January 1990.

Therefore the plaintiff case is valid, and should be processed by the court, while the defendant defence is invalid and should be ignored by the court.