1. When Steven Simkin divorced Laura Blank, they agreed to split their assets equally. They owned an account with Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities estimated to be worth $5.4 million. Simkin kept the account and paid Blank more than $6.5 million—including $2.7 million to offset the amount of the funds that they believed were in the account. Later, they learned that the account actually contained no funds due to its manager’s fraud. Steven and Laura Selectdiddid not Item 1 have a contract.2. The contract was related to their Selectprenuptial plansItem 2 .3. Under the contract they agreed to split their assets Selectin proportion to their income while marriedequally regardless of marital incomeaccording to their prenuptial agreementItem 3 .4. This contract Selecthasdoes not haveItem 4 all of the four required elements of a contract: agreement, capacity, consideration and legality.5. When the parties learned that the Madoff account was worthless, who might want to get out of this contract? SelectLauraStevenItem 56. SelectLauraStevenItem 6 would want to get out of this contract because SelectLauraStevenItem 7 kept the worthless account and paid SelectLauraStevenItem 8 cash for one-half of the supposed value.7. If a court does not enforce the contract between Steven and Laura, it is because of a lack of consentwritingItem 9 .8. If the parties had a voluntary consent problem, it was Selecta unilateral mistakea bilateral mistakefraudulent misrepresentationundue influenceItem 10 .9. SelectSteven wasLaura wasBoth parties wereItem 11 mistaken as to the value of the Madoff account.10. The mistake in this situation was a mistake of SelectfactvalueItem 12 .11. This is a mistake of SelectfactvalueItem 13 because the parties were mistaken as to Selecthow the account was being managedthe value of what was in the accountItem 14 .12. In a mistake in value case, the parties Selectassumedon’t assumeItem 15 the risk of the value changing, so that if the value changes, the parties cannot say it was a mistake.13. In this situation, the parties Selectwerewere notItem 16 mistaken as to the actual value of the account, but it Selectwaswas notItem 17 because they assumed the risk of the account changing value between the signing of the contract and the completion of the contract. It was because the value in the account had been 18 .14. A court Selectwouldwould notItem 19 likely rescind this agreement due to bilateral mistake.15. Laura Selectwouldwould notItem 20 have to return the money she received under the agreement.16. WHAT IF THE FACTS WERE DIFFERENT?What if the account was properly managed but the stock market had dropped from the time the agreement was made until Steven had to pay Laura the cash?Steven Selectcouldcould notItem 21 rescind the agreement.17. Given these revised facts, the mistake would be a mistake of SelectfactsvalueItem 22 .

The following transactions and events that occurred in the village of kowitt gorge during the calendar year 2019: 1. the village commissioners adopted the following budget: estimated revenues: property taxes $1,850,000 all other revenues 300,000 total revenues $2,150,000 appropriations: all departments other than police $1,000,000 police—salaries 600,000 police—fringe benefits 450,000 police—supplies 80,000 total appropriations $2,130,000 2. the village received, in cash, property taxes of $1,840,000 and all other revenues of $295,000. 3. the village made cash payments, charging the following appropriations: all departments other than police $1,000,000 police—salaries 595,000 police—fringe benefits 390,000 4. the administrator of fringe benefits received an invoice for police employee health insurance in the amount of $95,000, together with a letter from the insurance provider, explaining that the large increase was caused by a change in federal laws. the invoice could not be paid because the police—fringe benefits appropriation had a balance of only $60,000 (appropriation of $450,000 minus expenditures in item 3 of $390,000). as a result, the village commissioners amended the budget as follows: increase: appropriation for police—fringe benefits $35,000 decrease: appropriation for police—salaries 5,000 decrease: appropriation for police—supplies 25,000 use of fund balance 5,000 5. the village paid the invoice for $95,000, referred to in item 4 above, charging the appropriation for police—fringe benefits. 6. the police department placed po 2019a for firearms in the amount of $30,000 and po 2019b for uniforms in the amount of $20,000, all charged to the appropriation for police—supplies. (enter these pos as one transaction.) 7. after receiving po 2019a, the supplier notified the police department that a change in the design of the weapons would increase the cost to $32,000. the department sent the supplier an amended po, increasing it by $2,000. 8. the police department received the uniforms ordered on po 2019b, together with an invoice for $20,000. the department approved the invoice for payment. record the transactions and events applicable to the appropriations for police—fringe benefits and police—supplies in the following appropriations ledger. notes: use a negative sign with your answers if: 1. the amount entered in the appropriation column is a debit (dr.) rather than a credit (cr.); or 2. the amount entered in the expenditures column is a credit (cr.) rather than a debit ( in the available appropriation column, enter the appropriate balance after every transaction/event, even if a transaction isn't recorded in a particular ledger for that transaction. for transaction 6, enter both purchase orders (pos) as one combined transaction. appropriations ledger appropriation: police - fringe benefits appropriation encumbrances expenditures available transaction cr. dr. cr. dr. appropriation 1 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 2 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 3 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 4 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 5 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 6 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 7 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 8 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 appropriations ledger appropriation: police - supplies appropriation encumbrances expenditures available transaction cr. dr. cr. dr. appropriation 1 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 2 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 3 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 4 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 5 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 6 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 7 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 8 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0 answer 0