Multiple Choice
In Orkal Industries v. Array Connector, where Orkal bought parts from Array by sending an order form, but Array confirmed with its own form that contained different terms. Orkal did not object to the different terms until litigation arose later at which point the added terms mattered. The courts held that under the UCC:
A) the buyer, Orkal, controlled the terms, sos the original order form controls
B) the buyer, Orkal, controlled the terms, so the original order form controls; Array could have forced a change by requiring Orkal to recognize its different terms, but it failed to do so
C) the seller, Array, controlled because Orka di not object to the change in terms when the contract was formed
D) the seller, Array, controlled because under UCC 2-207, a sellers terms always control
E) none of the other choices are correct
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q136: Tender is:<br>A) a proper initiation of a
Q137: In Lee v. R&K Marine, where a
Q138: In Griffith v. Clear Lakes Trout, where
Q139: If, in a contract under the CISG,
Q140: In the event of a breach by
Q142: "Shrinkwrap" agreements that come attached to products
Q143: With respect to parol evidence and the
Q144: The (higher) price paid by a buyer
Q145: Under the UCC, the seller's basic obligation
Q146: When a seller agrees to supply all