the case of lake v Simmons 10:37 goes against the principal that identity must be of crucial importance being the businessman wife only meant that she was a person of means as in Phillips v brooks.. weather the jeweler would have only sold the necklace to the wife of the businessman with exclusion of anyone else? NO
Well explained. This is a good work. So helpful.
Great, It was so helpful and many thanks for updating. kindly share more law videos as the form of case studies or question and answers.
grateful please keep doing this its appreciated
the case of lake v Simmons 10:37 goes against the principal that identity must be of crucial importance being the businessman wife only meant that she was a person of means as in Phillips v brooks.. weather the jeweler would have only sold the necklace to the wife of the businessman with exclusion of anyone else? NO
So helpful
Thank you!