Multiple Choice
The text discusses the case of Landshire Food Service, Inc. v. Coghill, where the defendant, Coghill, sold his Rolls Royce to Bellman who paid with a forged cashier's check. Meanwhile, Hyken, an innocent purchaser for value, purchased the car from Bellman before the fraud was discovered. What was the result of this case?
A) Coghill was entitled to return of the vehicle because the contract with Bellman was void.
B) Coghill was entitled to return of the vehicle because the contract with Bellman was voidable by Coghill.
C) Hyken was entitled to the vehicle because a person who procures title through fraud receives voidable title and is able to transfer good title to a bona fide purchaser.
D) Hyken was entitled to the vehicle because although a person who procures title through fraud receives a void title, the person guilty of fraud may transfer good title to a bona fide purchaser.
E) The car was ordered sold with Coghill and Hyken to split the proceeds.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q16: What was the court's ruling in City
Q17: [Kool Klothes] Cleo recently opened an exclusive
Q18: With goods in bailment, when is an
Q19: Which of the following is true if
Q20: [Kool Klothes] Cleo recently opened an exclusive
Q22: The right to insure goods against any
Q23: What does the "I" mean in the
Q24: Jonas sold his motorcycle to his co-worker's
Q25: If a buyer and seller execute a
Q26: What happens when a buyer with a