Cases for Test 2, Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 9
Cases for Test 2, Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 9 Law 3220
Popular in Legal Environment of Business
Popular in Department
This 9 page Study Guide was uploaded by Grace Stewart on Sunday March 20, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to Law 3220 at Clemson University taught by K. Toussaint in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 38 views.
Reviews for Cases for Test 2, Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 9
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 03/20/16
Cases for chapters 5 6 7 and 9 CHAPTER 5 Commonwealth v Angelo Todesca Corp Gauthier drove a dump truck for Angelo Todesca police officer directing traffic was run over and killed backup horn on truck was not working Todesca knew horn wasn39t working violation of company safety procedures Gauthier was charged with driving offenses and had driving privileges restricted Commonwealth of MA charged Todesca with vehicular homicide Appeals court reversed the conviction of the jury To prove corporation is guilty of chemical offenses must prove individual committed a criminal offense at the time 0t committing Ottenses person quotwas engaged in some particular corporate businessquot and individual had authority to act for corporation on its behalf to carry out particular business when offenses occurred quotcorporationquot cannot operate a vehicle HELD Judgement of court affirmed corporations can be held criminally liable for acts performed by employees quotWithin the scope of their employmentquot and quoton behalf of the corporationquot United States v Young gas can be sold tax free only for marina use IRS believed Young was selling for cash deals at truck stops IRS believed Young shipped illegal money he made by Federal Express FedEx agreed to let the IRS xray packages shipped by Young found large amounts of cash inside at trial Young moved to suppress the evidence Young was convicted judgement affirmed FedEx told customers 1 do not ship cash and 2 we may open and inspect your packages at our option Young had NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY Young ASSUMED THE RISK Bridge v Phoenix Bond and Indemnity Co Illinois holds public auctions for tax liens on delinquent taxpayers39 properties buyers cannot use quotagent employees or other related entitiesquot Phoenix and others sued Bridge for fraudulently getting tax liens by filing false documents Violated RICO through racketeering involving mail fraud by sending false documents related to tax lien purchases District court dismissed RICO claims If there was a scam it was directed at County and property owners not plaintiffs and they could have a cause of action Appeals court reversed in favor of plaintiffs Defendants appealed HELD Judgement of Court of Appeals affirmed in plaintiff39s favor The bases of the mail fraud is a mailing that furthers a scheme to defraud even if the mailing does not contain false information mail was used to submit false attestations United States v Allmendinger Allmendinger Oncale and others ran investment scam misrepresented what they were selling pocketed lots of cash rather than investing it allmendinger began to hide assets mail fraud money laundering and securities fraud court ordered them to freeze all accounts lUdge im0039d sentences based 0 sentencina Guideline measures Allmendinger lack of cooperation and hiding his money 45 years Oncale 10 years appeals court will consider whether district court committed significant procedural error quotsubstantively reasonablequot quotabuse of discretionquot HELD No error in Allmendinger39s convictions and sentenoe CHAPTER 6 Squish La Flsh v Thomco Special Products Squish holds patent on quotTuna squeezequot ProPack was hired to help with store displays Propack brought in Thomco for advice on adhesives Thomco said adhesive would wash off but it didn39t Huge business loss from a Squish distributor Squish sued Thomco for Negligent misrepresentation District court granted summary judgement for Thomco Squish appealed HELD Reversed and remanded goes before trial court may have been reliance by Squish through ProPack on Thomco39s representations Palsgraf v Long Island RR Co Palsgraf waits on platform for a train Man trying to jump onto train with a package but looks like he might fall Guards try to help him as he teeters Drops package with explodes with fireworks Palsgraf gets injured and sues RR for negligence of its employees Jury finds for Palsgraf appellate court affirms RR Appeals Issue was it foreseeable that the guards could have caused Palsgraf39s injury HELD NO Case reversed and dismissed Gecsi v Lifetime Fitness Gezci is a member of Lifetime fitness Using treadmill began to jerk violently suffered an arm injury Lifetime employees told her they knew the machine was broken but no sign had been placed on it Gezci sued Lifetime for negligence and gross negligence Lifetime defended that as part of the membership agreement Gezci agreed to an exculpatory cause that could bar the claim She said she knew of the contract clause Gezci claimed that Lifetime was liable for willful and wanton behavior for failure to warn of danger posed by the malfunctioning machine Jury held for lifetime she appealed Releace did not distinguish between types of negligence but extended to ANY injury resulting from Lifetime39s negligence HELD Judgement affirmed Austin Vs Titan Sports Austin broke his neck during the quotrocker dropperquot told the other wrestler that he was hurt but said to keep fighting Austin assumed the risk by participating in the event knew of the risk and voluntarily assumed the risk Held for Austin held that Austin was 5 reliable Lee v GNMV Food lodged in man39s throat wife sued common law Strangers aren t under any duty to help someone in need unless there is a relationship duty of care Fuerschbach v Southwest Airlines Fuerschbach worked as a customer service rep for SW Airlines Her supervisor set up a mock arrest at the end of her probation period two cops handcuffed her and said she was under arrest she began to cry so the officers took her to the party in the back handcuffs removed and she still cried at the party so she was sent home she saw a psychologist who said she suffered from PTSD Fuerschbach sued everyone on the grounds of assault and battery District court didn39t take the case to trial and held for defendants HELD reversed did the actions Offend quota reasonable sense of personal dignityquot AKA Battery HELD Jury said it might offend it She had medical evidence ForgieBuccioni v Hannaford Brothers ForgieBuccioni went into grocery store and bought various items and left Bought wrong kind of cold medicine so he when to exchange the medicine and left the box he paid for on the counter Buccioni found the one he wanted and told different clerk he had already paid left store but manager Frender asked him to come back inside because he didn39t pay for Drixoral Frender IOUt BUCCioni in Store s security room and called police Officer arrested Buccioni and charges were dropped later Buccioni sued for false imprisonment awarded 100000 Hannaford Brothers appealed HELD Affirmed Lawler v Montblanc Montblanc makes highend writing implements and other luxury products Cynthia Lawler was retail store manager for 8 years and expected to work full time 8th year she developed medical conditions and doctor said she could only work20 hours a week she told montblanc was told by manager that she has to work 40 hours a week Lawler testified he Schmitz W83 quotunpleasantquot She said again that she could not work full time Company said that was part of her position offered her severance pay She refused sued for disability discrimination and intentional infliction of emotional distress District court HELD for Montblanc Appeals court affirmed that she had no claim for disability SChmitZ s conduct could not be characterized as quotexceeding all bounds of that tolerated civilized communityquot Laner s emotional distress is not severe HELD Affirmed District COUFtS summary judgement for defendants James v Bob Ross Buick James worked at Mercedes owned by Bob Ross Buick 2004 he was fired After he was fired Buick company sent letters to customers who had worked with james encouraging them to shop for Mercedes Letters addressed as if they were from James Bob Ross signed the letters Trial Court Summary judgement for Bob Ross James appealed Forgery of Signature is also known as an invasion of privacy Appropriation occurs when there is commercial benefit from the use of name or likeness HELD reversed and remanded Money that Bob Ross received as a result of appropriating James39s name can be a part of the actual damages to him James may seek nominal compensatory and punitive damages if appropriate Chambers v Travelers Karen Chambers worked for Travelers from 19872008 employees began to file complaints about her Chambers was warned about her behavior 2 months later her superior asked her if it was true she took her daughter with her on a business trip She was fired after this came to light Chambers sued for defamation District court HELD Travelers She appealed Employer has an interest in protecting itself and public against dishonest or harmful employees HELD Affirmed Travelers was entitled to the qualified privilege as a matter of law CHAPTER 7 Lightle v Real Estate Commission Lightle Alaska real estate agent listed house for sale by Leighs Williams made offer to buy Another realtor had a client Seeley who was interested in the house Lightle said house was available Seeley made an offer and Leighs accepted Unknown to Seeley Lightle wrote on her offer it was a quotbackup contractquot if Wimams coudn39t get financing Seeley found out rescinded offer demanded her deposit back Commissions heard case HELD that Lightle committed fraudulent misrepresentation Awarded Seeley damages Suspended Lightle s real estate license Lightle appealed HELD Affirmed Commission39s ruling Lightle made partial disclosure but failed to disclose facts that might have affected Seeley39s decision Slater Numismatics v Driving Force Slater bought and sold rare and modern coins worked with ICG to grade and ship coins to Cable Shopping Network which advertised coins for sale ICC and Slater shared revenues from that work Cable W83 Slater s most important client Taylor and Williams left ICG for ANACS and hired most of ICG39S key empoyees The knOWing the terms 0f Slater s deal with Cable offered Cable a better deal and took the account away from Slater Slater sued for intentional interference with contactual relations Trial court granted summary judgement for Driving Force Slater appealed Result is pecuniary loss from failure of 3rd person to perform the contract ANACS 83930 used Slater s confidential information and made a play for Cable s business while undercutting lCG s pricing HELD Reversed and remanded There is a triable claim for intentional interference with contractual relations in this case Gieseke v lDCA lnc Brothers Michael and Arthur Hogenson owned Standard Water together Gieseke worked for them Michael and Arthur got in a dispute and stopped working together Michael kept Standard and fired Gieseke bc he was friends with Arthur Gieseke and Arthur started Diversified Water Michael bought Arthurs half interest in Diversified Water and merged into a new company lDCA Michael changed all business correspondence for Diversified Water to another address without Gieseke39s consent Gieseke sued Michael and IDCA for interference with prospective advantage District court awarded 220000 to Gieseke IDCA and Michael appealed interference with business or customary relationship HELD Affirmed Diversified Water has reasonable expectation of economic advantage before IDCA interfered with that prospective advantage MacPherson v Buick Motor Company Buick sells cars to dealers NY dealer sells car to MacPherson Wheels made by another company wheel collapses causing accident that results in an injury MacPherson files a negligence suit Buick says it has no privity with MacPherson trial court holds that privity is not required MacPherson wins NY court of appeals holds manufacturer has primary control over product design and safety Defects would have been discovered by reasonable inspection which was omitted Buick is responsible for the finished product Judgement affirmed MacPherson wins Baxter v Ford Motor Company Baxter buys new Model A Printed material States quotTriple ShatterProof Classquot Rock hits windshield Baxter loses an eye Trial court did not allow advertising to be admitted into evidence Baxter appeals HELD Trial court erred in taking the case from the jury Representations of Ford were false and Baxter relied on them Ford failed to provide the safety glass as advertised Breach of express warranty Reversed and Remanded to grant a new trial allowing the advertisement to be admissible evidence Greenman v Yuba Power Wife buys husband power tool Two years later wood flies out of machine striking Greenman39s head He alleges breaches of warranties and negligence However Court of california is in favor of Greenman and says that the manufacturer is quotstrictly liable in tortquot By mid 19703 every state supreme court had adopted strict liability rule Parish v ICON Parish jumping on trampoline made by Jumpking Surrounded by safety net made by ICON Did a trick landed on his head and is now a quadriplegic Sued ICON and Jumpking for failure to warn of dangers in using products District court granted summary judgement for manufacturers Parish appealed HELD Affirmed Warnings were not inadequate NUMEROUS warnings in this case CHAPTER 9 Audi AG v D Amato D Amato registered domain name wwwaudisoortcom Sold goods and services with Audi logos Site used numerous Audi trademarks Claimed to have permission from an Audi dealership salesman AUdi sued D Amato for infringement dilution and cybersquatting of its three famous trademarks District court HELD for Audi Issued a permanent injunction against D39Amato his website and domain name D Amato appealed HELD Affirmed D39Amato infringed D Amato said that he had a signed agreement with Audi which was not true Dilution Law is also offended integrity and distinctiveness of mark is infringed upon Bowman v Monsanto Monsanto owns patents for Roundup Ready soybean seeds Sold with agreement that farmers will not resell the seeds or sell reproductions of the seeds Bowman bought the seeds and kept the seeds from plants he grew to use in future VIOLATION Monsanto sued for patent infringement He contended he could use the product any way he liked once purchased District and appeals court held for Monsanto Bowman appealed Supreme court affirmed Bowman is duplicating a patented good That infringes on the essence of a patent Bohnsack v Varco BOhnSaCk invented the quotPit Bullquot machine to make more efficient the process of cleaning drilling fluids used in drilling oil wells Varco is a company that cleans drilling fluids Secrecy agreement negotiated over the possibility that Varco would manufacture Pit Bull Varco s lawyer claims that Varco invented the Pit Bull Bohnsack sued Varco Jury awarded 600000 for misappropriation of trade secrets Varco said it did not quotusequot trade secret quotusequot is broadly defined VarCO eXPIOited 30hr13810k s idea for the Pit Bull would likely to result in injury to Bohnsack Filing a patent application by Varco would lower the market value of Bohnsak39s invention Judgement affirmed Misappropriation of trade secrets by Varco United States v Yang Lee native of Taiwan worked in research for Avery Lee visited taiwan approached by Yang and his daughter re providing info to their company Lee agreed and was paid 25000year for confidential information about new Avery products FBI confronted lee who agreed to participate in quotsting Operationquot to help arrest Yang Yang visits US and his meeting with Lee was filmed Yangs were arrested convicted fined 5 million They appealed saying materials used in sting operation were not actual trade secrets so they could not have violated the law HELD Convictions affirmed court held government was only required that the defendant believed it to be a trade secret This W83 a quotmutual understanding to try to accomplish a common and unlawful planquot
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'