Business Law Case 3

Reaction to discussion below: Melodee Lane Lingerie Co. was a tenant in a building where alarm systems were maintained by the ADT company. When the systems were defective and allowed water into the building, it damaged Melodee’s property; Then Melodee decided to sue ADT and their defense was that the service contract limited the liability to 10% of the annual service charge given to the customers. The limitation can be valid since the ADT company did not provide much liability protection. The ADT company can offer another protection plan to Melodee, which would cover her property but at a higher price rate. This case limitation of liability clauses will be enacted since ADT company was not fully liable for Melodee's property, which only would cover the limited 10%. A limitation of liability clauses contract states that one of the parties is not fully liable for damages in case of a breach. The ADT company is at fault for the malfunctions in their systems they should offer a higher…

Ellen, a citizen of California, was seriously injured in an automobile accident while driving in California.  She was injured due to the negligence of Sara, a citizen of Arizona, who ran a red light at an intersection.  Ellen is seeking 1.5 million in damages. 1.  Where may Ellen bring her suit? 2.  Discuss the process Ellen would have to follow in order to fully litigate her claim. 3.  If Sara is granted summary judgment at the trial court level, what may Ellen do next?  Explain her options.

Case: Brandt v. Boston Scientific Corporation and Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center Facts: Brenda Brandt was admitted to Bush Lincoln Health Center for treatment of urinary incontinence. She had a surgical procedure in which a sling was implanted. The manufacturer, Boston Scientific, recalled the item. Brenda had to have the sling surgically removed. She sued the manufacturer and the designer. In this case, Brandt’s bill from the Health Center reflects that of the $11,174.50 total charge for her surgery. $1,659.50, or 14.9%, was for the sling and its surgical kit. What provision of the UCC did the plaintiff sue under? What was the reasoning and decision of the court hearing the case

Warranty and strict liability represent two causes of action, often relied upon by plaintiffs who pursue recovery in a product liability case. Describe the two legal theories by making reference to the elements that need be proven; the obstacles with which a plaintiff may be confronted; the recoveries that be sought; and finally, the nature of the cause of action; hint from what discipline of law does each theory arise

Locate Alberta's Court of Justice Civil Procedure Regulation. Pursuant to Section 3(2)(b) of the Act, a civil claim must clearly state? Answer:

88. when may an agent in Florida write controlled business If writing an amount of similar business equal to or greater than If writing an amount of similar business of at least twice the amount of controlled business If accepting no commissions on the controlled business If not advertising to the general public as an insurance agent

Gibson v. Manchester City Council (1979) Issue: The issue on appeal was whether the defendant's letter of February 1971 was adequately construed as an offer which Gibson accepted or an invitation to treat.  Facts: The defendant City Council had adopted a policy of selling council houses to its tenants. The claimant was a tenant of such a council house, who had applied for details of the house he was renting and applicable mortgage terms, using the printed form designated and supplied by the defendant for this purpose. In February 1971, the city treasurer responded to this application stating, 'The [council] may be preparing to sell you the house at the purchase price…' and providing mortgage details. This letter also stated that it did not amount to a 'firm offer' of a mortgage and invited the claimant to make a formal application using an enclosed form. In March 1971, the claimant returned the completed form to the defendant. Following local elections in May of the same year, control…

Discuss what is intoxication in law ?  How can an person avoid a contract entered into under intoxication? a) Discuss in detail the following relevant case law on this matter and discuss in detail. Discuss the outcomes in this case. Gore v. Gibson 13M   b)  What is  Frustration in law?  Critically discuss. Discuss in detail the following relevant case law on this matter and discuss in detail. Discuss the outcomes in this case.    Taylor v. Caldwell (1863)

Part II: Draft an Answer and Counterclaim to the Complaint for either or both John Smith and/or Gary Brown. In other words, respond to Mary Smith’s allegations and allege any wrongs toward Mary Smith in the Counterclaim if you feel that either or both Defendants have such claims. Note that you must deny the claims made by Mary Smith and cannot simply mark “admit.” Then you will further explain your position and respond to each allegation made by Mary Smith. You must include in your Answer at least one (1) defense relating to the enforceability of a contract and one (1) defense relating to the discharge ability of the contract. Consider discussing whether the contract is enforceable or not in the Answer as a defense and how this particular contract may be dischargeable.

Give an example of a statute at the Federal Level and at the State Level. Give an example of an Administrative Agency at the Federal level.  Please list the 3 equitable remedies available to someone in a lawsuit.

Discuss the basic principles of jurisdiction from the text and from the landmark case of International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945). Please make sure to specifically discuss the concepts of “fair play and substantial justice” and “minimum contacts” from International Shoe. Additionally, discuss the difference between personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.

describing the commencement of either a civil or criminal proceeding and indicate how the case might ultimately be resolved of the Federal court system or within the NYS Court system

Kennecott Copper Corp. brings a challenge to an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order that rejected a portion of the State of Nevada’s implementation plan dealing with the control of stationary sources of sulfur dioxide (SO2). All of the SO2 emissions come from a single source—the Kennecott copper smelter at McGill. The EPA bases its decision on the belief that the Clean Air Act National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) must be met by continuous emission limitations to the maximum extent possible and that the Act permits the intermittent use of emission controls only when continuous controls are not economically feasible. Kennecott contends that the EPA must approve any State implementation plan that will attain and maintain an NAAQS within the statutory time period. Who will prevail? Why?

2. Shafron v. KRG Insurance Brokers (Western) Inc., 2009 SCC 6 (CanLII) Shafron sold his insurance agency to KRG and was subsequently employed by its successor, KRG Insurance Brokers (Western) Inc. Each employment contract contained a restrictive covenant whereby Shafron agreed that for three years after leaving his employment, he would not work for an insurance brokerage within the "Metropolitan City of Vancouver." When he left the respondent company and began working as an insurance salesman for another agency in Richmond, BC, KRG Western commenced an action to enforce the restrictive covenant. The trial judge dismissed the action, finding that the term "Metropolitan City of Vancouver" in the restrictive covenant was neither clear, certain, nor reasonable. The trial decision was reversed on appeal. The appeal court agreed that the term "Metropolitan City of Vancouver" was ambiguous; however, it severed that term and held that the term means the "City of Vancouver, the University of…

How far does jurisdiction extend over the person in a judicial process?Carry out written work related to the topic of jurisdiction. Instructions:Answer the following questions:What is the basis for the existence of long arm statutes? What is sought to be protected by the theory of minimum contacts, when determining jurisdiction over the person in a judicial process? How is the plaintiff affected or benefited from long arm statutes and minimum contact theory? How is the defendant affected or benefited from the long arm statutes and the minimum contact theory?

In Brooks v. Lewin Realty III, Inc., the Md Ct App held that for plaintiff to make out a prima facie case, she must show that (select the best answer): O the plaintiff did not cause the violation of the ordinance, that plaintiff did not contribute to the injury, and that the injury was suffered by a contractor trying to repair the walkway to the house if not repaired, a violation of an ordinance may occur, an injury is possible if the condition of the house is not repaired, and that the legislature sought to increase the tax base of the rental house or unit involved Othere is a violation of an ordinance, that the violation proximately caused an injury, and that the injured plaintiff was in a class of people intended to be protected by the ordinance O it was not her fault that the paint in the dwelling was peeling, that the peeling paint was lead paint, and that there was someone who was injured in the past by this landlord

Upon becoming employed by a state-licensed mortgage company, an individual who works for a depository institution as a mortgage loan originator (MLO) shall not be deamed to have tamporary suthority to act as an MLO in an application state if which of the following events has occurred? A) The individual has been a witness in a trial where the defendant was convicted of felony fraud. B) The individual has been subject to a court order for payment of child support. C) The individual had an application for an MLO license denied or an MLO license revoked or suspended in any governmental jurisdiction. D) The individual has submitted an application to be a state-licensed MLO in the application state and was registered in the NMLS as an MLO by the prior omplover

Deran Cody, a U.S. citizen, married Isolde Trieste, a Portuguese citizen, who came to the U.S. in September 2021 as a tourist to visit her sister. Deran earned $81,000 and Isolde had no U.S. or Portuguese income. Neither Deran or Isolde is a dependent of anyone else. A Form W-7 should be filed for Isolde because she: Qualifies as a resident alien under the substantial presence test. Is a qualifying relative of her sister. Is the qualifying person of a resident spouse, so Deran can claim the head of household filing status. Can make a spousal election to be considered a U.S. resident for tax purposes.

Olga, a resident of Maine, was recently injured by a defective product produced by Home Appliance Corporation, which is incorporated in Delaware but has its company headquarters in Virgina. Olga purchased the defective product in Maine. Olga is suing Home Appliance for $60,000. Which courts would have personal jurisdiction in this case? Would a federal court have jurisdiction? Why or why not?

Webster v. Blue Ship Tearoom. Can you think of other situations today for which this case might serve as legal precedent? PRISCILLA D. WEBSTER V. BLUE SHIP TEA ROOM, INC. SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS   FACTS: Priscilla Webster, a restaurant patron who ordered seafood chowder and choked on a fishbone, brought this case. She maintained that she would not have reasonably expected to find a bone in the chowder. As a result of the bone in the chowder, Webster suffered through several hospital procedures to remove the bone, at considerable cost and pain. At the trial, a jury found for Webster. The Blue Ship Tea Room, the defendant, appealed the case on the basis of the legal interpretation of the implied warranty of merchantability. The appellate decision has become a classic in American jurisprudential reasoning.   REASONING: The court, in great detail, discussed the rich culinary history of New England seafood chowders. In going through the details of exactly how good chowder is…

19) The Elle Corporation manufactures fingernail polish. Suzy buys a container of Elle's fingernail polish, applies it to her nails, and suffers a severe allergic reaction. She sues Elle under the implied warranty of merchantability, The test for determining whether Suzy will recover is whether: A) the nail polish she bought was suitable for the needs of the average consumer. B) the nail polish she bought properly performed its function of coloring one's nails. C) such a reaction in an appreciable number of consumers was reasonably foreseeable. D) the ingredient causing the reaction was foreign to the nail polish or natural to it. nating one model, Bobby notices

Carli is a landlord in Florida. She places all security deposits and advance rents into an interest-bearing account in a Florida bank. Which Act makes this legal? This is not legal. Under the Florida Real Estate Commission's statutes, a landlord can only place security deposits and advance rents in a non-interest bearing account. the Florida Housing and Urban Development Act the Florida Residential Landlord and Tenant Act the Real Estate Procedures Act

Michael Hauck claimed that he was discharged by his employer, Sabine Pilot Service, because he refused its direction to perform the illegal act of pumping the bilges of the employer’s vessel into the waterways. Hauck was an employee at will, and Sabine contends that it therefore had the right to discharge him without having to show cause. Hauck brought a wrongful discharge action against Sabine. Decide.Please give your answer using the IRAC format. Issue: Call of the QuestionRule: Rule of Law to be applied to properly answer the questionAnalysis: Applying the rule of law to the facts of the problem presentedConclusion: Answer to the Issue

In Kelo v. New London (mentioned in Chapter 12 on p. 429), the U.S. Supreme Court made one of its most controversial decisions in the last 20 years; in a brief summary, the Court dramatically expanded the meaning of the phrase “for public use.” Please find and read the actual Kelo case, both the majority and the dissenting opinions, and please indicate in a one to two-page, double-spaced paper, what the majority and dissent ruled and why, and whether you agree with the majority or dissent, explaining your rationale. Make sure to discuss relevant legal principles as appropriate.

Bob, an engineer, is a new employee at Airbag Industries, which specializes in manufacturing automotive airbags. Before his employment, Bob is required to sign various documents indicating that he would have access to confidential information related to Airbag Industries' business practices, customer lists, and other information that must remain confidential. It further provided that any new developments created by Bob would be the property of Airbag Industries. Further, it provided that if Bob left the company he could not compete against the company in the United States for 10 years. Bob leaves three years later to set up his own airbag company. Identify the intellectual property of Airbag Industries.

Bob, an engineer, is a new employee at Airbag Industries, which specializes in manufacturing automotive airbags. Before his employment, Bob is required to sign various documents indicating that he would have access to confidential information related to Airbag Industries' business practices, customer lists, and other information that must remain confidential. It further provided that any new developments created by Bob would be the property of Airbag Industries. Further, it provided that if Bob left the company he could not compete against the company in the United States for 10 years. Bob leaves three years later to set up his own airbag company.  Explain why protecting their intellectual property is important to Airbag Industries.     What intellectual property issues are involved in this scenario?