The trial court ruled in favor of the Sedmaks and ordered that Charlie's Chevrolet sell them the Corvette for the MSRP (manufacturer's suggested retail price) of $15,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, meaning that Charlie's Chevrolet would have no choice but to sell the Sedmaks the car for $15,000.

Without having seen all of the evidence, what do you think of the court ruling in favor of the Sedmaks? Do you think it seems like there was a contract between the Sedmaks and Charlie's Chevrolet?

What do you think of the court forcing Charlie's Chevrolet to sell the Sedmaks and the Corvette for the MSRP of $15,000? Do you agree that sometimes money damages aren't enough and a party to a contract should be forced to do what they contracted for?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Question 1 Part a According to the Sedmaks Charlies Chevrolet must sell the Corvette to them for 15000 as instructed by the Court of Appeals Mr Sedmaks wife was given a discount on the automobile as p... View the full answer