Business Law BLW 3013
Popular in Course
Popular in Business Law
verified elite notetaker
This 9 page Class Notes was uploaded by Lavon Nolan I on Thursday October 29, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to BLW 3013 at University of Texas at San Antonio taught by John Shields in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 21 views. For similar materials see /class/231345/blw-3013-university-of-texas-at-san-antonio in Business Law at University of Texas at San Antonio.
Reviews for Business Law
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: 10/29/15
CHAPTER 2 COURTS AND ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION COLE V MILETI Problem Mileti did not pay Cole back forthe loan Cole loaned to Mileti s lm Mileti argued the jurisdiction of the case Issue Was there a breach of contract Source of Law Agreement Fed Court Case Court District Court of Ohio 3 part test BIRD V PARSONS Problem Bird sued Parsons for copyright infringement on wwwefinanciacom because they had a website called wwwfinanciacom Issue Jurisdiction on Ohio and copyright infringement Source of Law Federal Court Case Court US Court of Appeals HIGH PLAINS V FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Problem Mercury was encoding bids on licenses and won them again High Plains High plains asked FCC to review bids but FCC denied punishment on Mercury Issue Was High Plains unfairly beat Source of Law Federal Court Case Court US Court of Appeals District of Columbia CHAPTER 3 COURT PROCEDURES RIO PROPERTY INCv RII Problem RII had a website riosportscom and Rio Property had trademarks on rio names RII disabled riosportscom but then made betriocom RII only wanted to be contacted through email However RII did not comply with the courts orders Issue RII appealed saying the service of process was improper Source of Law Federal Court Case agreement constitution Court US Court of Appeals AUSLEY V BISHOP Problem Bishop worked for Ausley trying to get his appraisal license After Ausley decided to redo their contract with lower pay and Bishop refusedAusley began to slander Bishop s name Ausley filed that Bishop also had a breach of contract Issue Bishop appealed the case and counterclaimed Ausley for slander Ausley requested a summary judgement The courts remanded the case Source of Law State Court Case Agreement Court Court of Appeals of North Carolina LEBLANC V HONDA Problem LeBlanc wrecked into a Honda ATV while driving his snowmobile LeBlanc said the Honda was mimicking USA because it was red white and blue Issue Did Honda get a fairtrial Court ruled that Honda did not get a fairtrial because of racial and national bias Sources of Law State Court Case Court Supreme Court of New Hampshire CHAPTER 4 CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO REGULATE BUSINESS RENO V CONDON Problem Condon sued Reno attorney general at the time because he said the DPPA violated the US Constitution Underthe US Law most states require people to opt in to release their information from the DMV to other people However in South Carolina the law is that the information is available until the people opt out of it being released Issue Did the DPPA violate the constitution Court ruled that under the commerce clause the DPPA did not violate anything Sources of Law Federal Court Case Constitution Court Supreme Court FERGUSON V FRIEND FINDERS INC Problem Friendfinders sent Ferguson an unsolicited email and did not comply with the state regulations of spam Ferguson sued Friend nders for violating the dormant commerce clause Issue Did Friendfinders violate the dormant commerce clause Yes the burden ofthe dormant clause did not outweigh the benefits of it Sources of Law State Court Case Regulation Agency Court California Court of Appeal BAD FROG BREWERY V NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY Problem Bad Frog s label pictured a frog giving the finger so the NYSLA denied the company to sell the beer because it could be exposed to children Bad Frog sued for an injunction against the denial of the application to be legalized Issue Should Bad Frog be denied because the NYSLA is trying to protect minors Court ruled that NYSLA did not provide enough alternatives to the ban and they lacked reasonable fit so Bad Frog won Sources of Law Federal Court Case Regulatory Court US Court of Appeals Chapter 5 Court US Court of Appeals Eight Circuit 2002 51 Mathis Vs Lui Problem Paci ca Cornetta wrongfully induced Evans into forgoing his contractual obligations to Mathis causing Evans to break the clause in his contact stating a 6 month written notice of departure Mathis then sought for damages for loss of sales lssue Do sales made by Evans after leaving Mathis for Pacifica Cornetta constitute Mathis receiving money for loss of sales Solution The court sided with the lower courts ruling The defendants had committed wrong by interfering with the Mathis amp Evans Contract However Mathis will receive no more money for loss of sales because Pacifica Cornetta could terminate its contract at any time Winner Mathis Source of Law Federal Court Case Agreement Common Law 52 Martin Vs Walmart Court US Court of Appeals Eight Circuit 1990 Problem Martin was walking through an aisle and slipped on some shotgun pellets Martin is seeking damages for injuries received during the fall lssue Did Walmart have adequate notice ofthe pellets on the ground Solution It was found that Walmart had enough notice to have the pellets cleaned from the aisle considering it was a main aisle of the store Winner Martin Source of Law Federal Court Case 53 Palsggf Vs Lonq Island Railroad Co Court New York Court oprpeals 1928 Problem While railroad guards help a man onto a moving train the man drops a package The package unknown to the railroad guards contained fireworks which went off upon hitting the tracks shooting off The explosion caused some scales on the opposite side of the station to fall hitting Palsgraf Issue Is the railroad station responsible forthe injuries Palsgraf received Solution Case was dismissed The railroad was not held responsible because the injury was unforeseeable Winner Railroad station Source of Law State Courts Common Law 54 Crews Vs Hollenbach Court Court of Special Appeals of Maryland 1990 Problem Lee James Crew was severely injured in an explosion while trying to fix a gas leak caused several hours earlier by John Hollenbach lssue Does Crews deserve compensation from Hollenbach for injuries suffered on the job considering the nature of risk involved in Crews job Solution It was determined that Crews was aware ofthe risks that were associated with his job Therefore Hollenbach wasn t responsible for injury damages Winner Hollenbach Source of Law State Court Case Common Law Chapter 6 61 Jarvis Vs Ford Moter Co Court US Court of Appeals Second Circuit 2002 Problem Kathleen Jarvis bought a new Ford Aerostar and six days later she had a wreck claiming that a defect caused the vehicles engine rev out of control shortly after starting Issue Was the wreck caused by human error or a defect over looked by Ford Solution It was concluded that Ford had been negligent in the design ofthe cruise control And that no further proof was needed because the product clearly didn t perform as the manufacturer intended Winner Jarvis Source of Law Federal Court Case common law 62 Greenman Vs Yuba Power Products Inc Court Supreme Court of California 1962 Problem A man was injured while using a powertool and filed a suit against the retailer and the manufacturer claiming defective design and a breach of warranties Issue Wasthe retailer and the manufacturer responsible forthe poor construction design defect If so would they stay loyal to their warrenties Solution The higher court upheld the jury ruling for Greenman The manufacturer was held strictly liable for the unsafe product Winner Greenman Source of Law State Court Cases Agreement 63 Liriano Vs Hobart Corp Court US Court of Appeals Second Ciruit 1999 Problem A new and untrained worker who recently immigrated is injured while using a meat grinder without its safety on Issue Was Hobart Corp liable for failing to warn about the importance of always using the safety when in operation Solution Hobart Corp was held liable for failing to warn about alterations to the grinder Winner Liriano Source of Law Federal Court Case Regulatory 64 Smith and lngersollRand Co Court Alaska Supreme Court 2000 Problem Dan Smith was injured by a portable air compressor an older model when a doorthat had to be propped open fell and Smith in the head while he wasn t wearing a safety helmet Issue Because Smith was acting in a negligent way is it possible to account for ordinary negligence in a product liability suit Solution Yes Winner lngersollRand Co Source of Law State Court Case Legislation Chap 7 nature and terminology Homer v Burman whether or not a contract for electrical work had come into existence giving the absence ofwritten agreement 1 Homer paid burman to rewire their house Burman did poor work and caused further electrical problems Homer filed suit against burman claiming a breech in contract The courts ruled in favor of burman contrary to law as by not performing he ork in a skillful and workman like manner Source of Law State Court Case Agreement Homer won Industrial lift truck service corp v Mitsubishi International Corp i whether quasi contract should be allowed in view ofthe fact that an express contract covers the matter in controversy h IL made a design to the lift truck that Mitsubishi took and used to better suIt the American market Mitsubishi terminated the agreement IL sued under quasicontractual principals to recover bene ts conferred on Mitsubishi by the design Source of Law State court Case Agreement Courts dismissed the case Mitsubishi won Dis atch automation INC v Richards whether there was a valid contract given ambiguous terms the court applied common sense the case quot Richards was a software developer for DA He owned the rights to software licensed it out to the corporation The couple had a falling out Richards resigned and an employee DA led suit against Richards claim a breech in contract and Richards did not own RIMS the corporation did Source of Law Federal Court Case Agreement Courts issued summary ofjudgement for Richardes as they owned RiMS not DA Richards won Chapter 8 Agreement Lucy v Zehmer l39lt Whether there was agreement between the two parties 39139 Lucy and Zehmer were drinking and jokingly talking bout selling Ferguson farms Lucy nally got a the sale in writing to sell the farm for 50000 Zehmer claimed that he was drunk and made the offer in jest Courts ruled in favor of Zehmer Supreme court over turned lower courts stating that the writing was enforceable Source of Law State Court Case Agreement Lucy Won the issue Satellite Entertainment Center Inc v Keaton of 175000 would be paid and that Keaton would need to be out by years end Winograd did not pay Keaton on the basis that the contract did not include essential terms The courts ruled that the terms could be identified and therefore ruled in favor of Keaton forthe 175000 Source of Law State Court Case Agreement Keaton Won the issue Os rey LLC v Kellymoore paint Co Whether the agreement was sent on acceptable terms and therefore enforeceable Osprey leased out to KMP a 15 year lease with two 5 year renewals The KMP sent the 15 year renewal in by first class mail At the end ofthe rst fiveyear renewal KMP sent the renewal in by fax and had the acceptance con rmation con rmed by the phone company Osprey filled suit to evict KMP The courts ruled that the substituted method of notice performed the same action as authorized mail Ruled in favor of KMP Source of Law State Court Case Agreement KMP won the issue Chapter 9 Consideration Hammer v Sidway did the contract have valid consideration in Story Sr promised to pay his nephew not to pay his nephew 5000 if he would not drink smoke gamble until he was 21 Hamer third party in which the nephews rights were tranfered to recive this payment was refused by the executor ofthe estate claim there had been no valid consideration The court ruled that by forbadence of said activities was valid consideration Therefore hammer was entitled the money Hammer won Common Law NY state court case and the verbal agreement Powell v MVE holdings lnc Whether an agreement between the executives was void for lack of consideration h MVE would not pay Powell the 125 per share as agreed upon for his actions agreed upon Courts ruled that there was not a lack of consideration Thus Powell was entitled the money Source of Law State Court Cases Agreement Mills v Berlex laboratories Whether the release was binding Problem Mills was being terminated from Berlex Berlex offered a substantial severance package Mills was ask to sign a seperation and release agreement effective the day after his termination Mills injured his back while moving Berlex boxes and filled a claim with Berlex berlex refused to pay Courts ruled in favor of Berlex the release barred Mills from short term disability Source of Law State Court Cases Agreement Berlex won the Issue Chapter 10 Capacity And Legality Dodson v Shrader Whether a minor should be held responsible for damage ordinary wear and tear and depreciation of goods used by the minor prior to his disa rmance of the contract quotn Dodson 16yr old bought a truck from Shrader auto A mechanic told Dodson that the truck had a burnt valve the truck blew up Dodson disaffirmed the contract and sought to return it for a full refund Shraders refused Shraders say the truck had dropped 500 dollars in value Trial court ordered Shraders to refund the full 4900 Supreme court remanded the case back to trail court for factual determination and the FMV of the truck Source of Law State Court Case Agreement Shrader won the Issue RCDI construction Inc v SpaceplanArchitecture Planning and interiors Whether a contract entered into with an unlicensed contractor could server as the basis for an action for wrongful interference with a contractual relation 9 n RCDI was nearly complete on construction substantial water damage appened in the hotel SAPI told Patel hotel owner To terminate and gut the hotel and start it over RCDI filled suit against SAPI Alleging wrongful interference No valid contract existed as RCDI was not licensed in NC thus could not sue SAPI for wrong interference with the contract Source of Law Federal Court Case Agreement SAPI won the issue Moore v Midwest Distribution Inc Restriction on competition must protect a legitimate business and must not be any greater than nessecary to protect that interest 39n Moore was asked to sign a Service work for hire agreement Moor quit hIs job and went to work for Godwin Midwest filled suit against moore to prevent him from providing services to Godwin The court ruled that the covenant not to compete was unenforceable because it did not protect the legitimate interest of Midwest Dist And the geographical scope ofthe agreement was unreasonably broad Source of Law State Court Case Agreement Moore Won Beaver v Grand Prix Karting association l Whether an exculpatory clause could be enforced against a racer who although she was likely aware ofthe organizers requirment that she sign the clause somehow participating in the race wo signing it quot Beaver without signing exculpatory clause took part in the race and hit a pIece of foam on the track hitting her head nad causing a multi kart wreck Beaver lled suit on multi ground of torts The courts ruled in favor of the organizers as she did not sign one her actions showed she was bound by its terms Source of Law Federal Court Case Agreement Grand Prix won the issue Kask v Nike m whether or not certain statements constituted commercial speech Nike won 3 elements of commercial speech satisfied United States v Lopez Issue Does the GunFree School Zone Act amount to an unconstitutional law Short Answer Yes Sources of Law Constitution Article 1 section 8 powers of congress interstate commerce clause 3 elements necessary for a effective offer 1 The offeror must have serious intention to become bound by the offer 2 the terms ofthe offer must be reasonably certain or de nite so that the parties and the court can ascertain the terms of the contract 3 The offer must be communicated by the offeror to the offeree resulting in the offeree s knowledge of the offer 9 Sources of law 1 US constitution 2 State constitution 3 Federal Statutes 4 State Statutes 5 Federal Agency Regulations FCC SEC FTC 6 State Agency Regulations TXDOT DPS 7 Federal Courts 8 State Courts 9 ContractAgreement
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'