On january 1, 2017, holland corporation paid $9 per share to a group of zeeland corporation shareholders to acquire 60,000 shares of zeeland's outstanding voting stock, representing a 60 percent ownership interest. the remaining 40,000 shares of zeeland continued to trade in the market close to its recent average of $8.00 per share both before and after the acquisition by holland. zeeland's acquisition date balance sheet follows:

On december 31, 2011, daggett company issued $750,000 of ten-year, 9% bonds payable for $700,353, yielding an effective interest rate of 10%. interest is payable semiannually on june 30 and december 31. prepare journal entries to reflect (a) the issuance of the bonds, (b) the semiannual interest payment and discount amortization (effective interest method) on june 30, 2012, and (c) the semiannual interest payment and discount amortization on december 31, 2012. round amounts to the nearest dollar.

Alandowner and his neighbor purchased adjoining undeveloped lots. after both built homes on their respective lots, the landowner suggested to the neighbor that a common driveway be built where the two lots joined. the neighbor agreed. the landowner and the neighbor split the cost of constructing the driveway and entered into a written agreement to equally share the costs of its upkeep and maintenance. the agreement was recorded in the county recorder's office. two years later, the neighbor built a new driveway located entirely on his lot. the common driveway, which the landowner continued to use but which the neighbor no longer used, began to deteriorate. the landowner asked the neighbor for money to maintain the common driveway, but the neighbor refused to contribute. three years later, the neighbor conveyed his lot to a friend. the friend entered into possession and used only the driveway built by the neighbor. by this time, the common driveway had deteriorated badly and contained numerous potholes. the landowner asked the friend to pay half of what it would take to repair the common driveway. the friend refused. the landowner repaired the driveway and sued the friend for 50% of the cost of repairs. will the landowner prevail?

Gwen, a manager at exude apparels inc., received a message from a customer requesting a replacement for a purchased pair of shoes. exude apparels has a clearly stated no-return policy. gwen responded to the customer denying the request in a tactful and clear manner. despite this, the customer submitted a second request. in this scenario, which of the following is an appropriate response to the second request?