This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: furniture had defects. Beth should have contacted the furniture store and informed them of the defects. The store would replace or end the financial agreement between the two, provided that there was indeed a defect of the product and not because of Sue. If it could be proven that Sue caused the defect then she would remain responsible for the remainder of the balance of the furniture. Beth is not responsible for anything due to being the guaranty agreement. Sue’s responsibility relies on the cause of the defect whether she continues or ceases payments....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 10/24/2011 for the course LAW BB3210 taught by Professor Profsantiago during the Spring '11 term at Columbia Southern University, Orange Beach.
- Spring '11