benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU / On February 15, a company that manufactures metal sidings for home exteriors…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

On February 15, a company that manufactures metal sidings for home exteriors received the following order from a builder: "Please ship 300 sheets of 1/4-inch refabricated aluminum siding. Delivery by April 1. "On March 8, the company shipped 300 sheets of 1/2-inch refabricated aluminum siding, which were received by the builder on March 10. The following day, the builder sent the following fax to the company: "Be advised that your shipment is rejected. Order stipulated 1/4-inch sheets. " This fax was received by the company, but the builder did not ship the nonconforming aluminum sheets back to the company. Did the builder properly reject the shipment delivered on March 10?

choices

  1. Yes, because the aluminum sheets were nonconforming goods.
  2. Yes, because the company did not notify the builder that the 1/2-inch sheets were for accommodation only.
  3. No, because the builder waived its right to reject the nonconforming goods by not returning them promptly to the company.
  4. No, because the company could accept the builder's offer by prompt shipment of either conforming or nonconforming goods.

subject

professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

Official source

initial import