Suppose jack steals a truckload of sony​ high-definition televisions that are owned by electronics store. the thief resells the televisions to​ city-mart, which does not know that the goods were stolen. if electronics store finds out where the televisions are, it can reclaim them. because the thief had notitle in the goods, title was never transferred to city mart. city mart must return the goods to electronics store and can only sue the thief, assuming the thief can ever be found.

True

Explanation:

A thief that steals goods cannot pass good title of them, so any sale to a third party can be voided and the goods must return to their proper owner.

In this case even if City Mart purchased the TVs in good faith, they must return them to Electronics Store. So now City Mart's only hope to recover some money is to sue Jack.

It would be different if Jack had committed fraud in order to get the TVs and then sold them to City Mart. When a third party in good faith purchases goods obtained through fraud, go title passes to the buyer.

net worth is the difference between what you own and what you have. if you exceed your liabilities you have a positive net worth. if your liabilities are greater than your assets you have a negative net worth. its a snapshot of your financial situation. if you calculate your net worth you will see the end result of everything you've earned and spent as of now. net worth statements and all you asked of can you determine where you are, how to get where you want to be, if your spending   to much. honestly it can tell you a lot of things. i can go on, but you can paint the picture from here.

explanation:

explanation: doctrine of respondeat superior is a legal doctrine that is commonly used in tort. this principle makes an employer or principal legally responsible for the wrongful acts done by an employee or agent, if such acts occur within the scope of the employment or agency.