Staples (Next friend of) v. Varga (c.o.b.

True Legends Sports Cards And Comics)

1. I believe it should have because it is not his money. Spending your parents
money without permission is incredibly dangerous, and stupid. If it were my parents they
would have disowned me. Seriously.
2. He said that he was entitled to a refund because he was not of age, and the
comics werent necessities.
3. It justified it because he was not forced into buying the comics, and most of the
comics even went up in value.
4. A next friend of is a person who represents one who is unable to represent
himself.

Willoughby v. Gallant
1. That he gave Gallant a chance to test run it, and to get it inspected, but he
refused to do either.
2. That Willoughby had not notified him of any problems with the sea-doo, and that
he was tricking him into buying it.
3. No. He could have waited a day or two before he testran it. That is a
meaningless excuse.

Freeman v. General Motors Acceptance corp. of Canada Ltd.

1. What prompted them was the fact that Freeman didnt pay his debt for the two
cars he bought.
2. The mistake that he tried to take advantage of was a mail he got saying that he
had to pay much less than initially intended.
3. That he paid the debt, even though he had paid less than was meant. He also
said that that had been a reached agreement which it was not.
4. They were applied because General Motors Acceptance corp. of Canada Ltd.
made a human mistake of writing the wrong amount of money due.

Berry v. Nencescu Estate

1. That Sid was really dominant and intimidating
2. That being able to do something doesnt mean it was done, and that more
evidence is needed to show that Sid exerted dominance.
3. He didnt have much evidence. The evidence he did have was weak. The counter
evidence was stronger. It seemed like he just wanted money.
4. The will would have been deemed invalid.
By: Noah Dashney and Strahinja Radakovic