Can integrity be situational

The following selected circumstances relate to pending lawsuits for erismus, inc. erismus’s fiscal year ends on december 31. financial statements are issued in march 2019. erismus prepares its financial statements according to u. s. gaap. required: indicate the amount erismus would record as an asset, liability, or not accrued in the following circumstances. 1. erismus is defending against a lawsuit. erismus's management believes the company has a slightly worse than 50/50 chance of eventually prevailing in court, and that if it loses, the judgment will be $1,000,000. 2. erismus is defending against a lawsuit. erismus's management believes it is probable that the company will lose in court. if it loses, management believes that damages could fall anywhere in the range of $2,000,000 to $4,000,000, with any damage in that range equally likely. 3. erismus is defending against a lawsuit. erismus's management believes it is probable that the company will lose in court. if it loses, management believes that damages will eventually be $5,000,000, with a present value of $3,500,000. 4. erismus is a plaintiff in a lawsuit. erismus's management believes it is probable that the company eventually will prevail in court, and that if it prevails, the judgment will be $1,000,000. 5. erismus is a plaintiff in a lawsuit. erismus’s management believes it is virtually certain that the company eventually will prevail in court, and that if it prevails, the judgment will be $500,000.

In the united states, one worker can produce 10 tons of steel per day or 20 tons of chemicals per day. in the united kingdom, one worker can produce 5 tons of steel per day or 15 tons of chemicals per day. the united kingdom has a comparative advantage in the production of:

Abeverage company puts game pieces under the caps of its drinks and claims that one in six game pieces wins a prize. the official rules of the contest state that the odds of winning a prize are is the claim "one in six game pieces wins a prize" correct? why or why not? 1: 6.