Individual Assignment: Business Entities, Laws, and Regulations Paper Restaurant/bar: Lou and Jose plan to open a sports bar and restaurant where customers socialize and watch sporting events on large-screen TVs that hang around the bar. They do not have much money, but they do have Miriam, a wealthy investor who does not have time to participate in the business, but wants to provide capital to start the business in return for a percentage ownership. Extermination business: Frank is a wealthy investor who plans to open a chain of exterminating businesses across the United States. Professional practice: Akiva and Tara have just completed all educational and experiential requirements to be licensed as obstetricians. They want to open a birth clinic together. They will take out a large loan to finance start-up costs. Construction Scenario: Mei-Lin is the hiring manager for Surebuild, Inc., a new construction company. She has advertised a position as a jackhammer operator. The position’s description states that the successful applicant must have a high school diploma. The following people apply for the position: Michelle, 35, who appears to be pregnant, is a high school graduate, and was formerly employed as a jackhammer operator; Eric, 55, who is experienced with a jackhammer, but has no high school diploma; Felipe, who is 38, speaks no English, has no high school diploma, but is experienced with a jackhammer; and Nick, 23, a college graduate who is epileptic, and has no experience with a jackhammer. • Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper, discussing two of the above three businesses, and the Construction scenario. For each business, discuss the business entity that represents the best choice for each business, taking control, taxation, and liability issues into consideration. Identify laws and regulations each business must consider in starting the business, and identify risks against which each business must protect itself. For the Construction Scenario, identify the employment discrimination issues in the scenario and discuss how to deal with such discrimination issues by citing,discussing and applying the applicable federal employment discrimination laws and regulations.
Learning Team Assignment: Foodmart, Inc. Paper Foodmart, Inc. is a retail grocery store chain based in Any State, U.S.A. Foodmart has stores throughout the United States. Brian McDonald works as the produce manager for the store in My Town, U.S.A. Jeremy Atwater, 17 years old, is spending his summer vacation working for Brian in the produce department. • Write a 1,050- to 1,750-word paper with detailed answers to the following scenarios: o Foodmart contracted with Masterpiece Construction to renovate the store on Main Street in My Town. Masterpiece, unable to complete the renovation within the 6-month time limit due to an increase in new contracts, subcontracted the job to Build Them to Fall Construction. Foodmart was unaware of the subcontract. When Foodmart realized, due to the poor quality of work, that Build was handling the renovation, Foodmart petitioned the court for an injunction and sued Masterpiece for breach of contract and specific performance. Masterpiece argued that it had a right to delegate the duties of the contract, or to discharge the contract due to commercial impracticability. Who wins? Explain your answer. Summarize the legal defenses to contract formation and enforcement. • At the end of the summer, Jeremy Atwater earned enough money to put a down payment on a car. He decides to continue working part-time during school to earn money for the car payments. Jeremy purchased a car from Smooth Sales Used Cars. Smooth did not ask Jeremy how old he was; the salesman assumed he reached the age of majority. Jeremy paid the down payment and signed a contract stating that he would make payments of $200 each month. Six months later, Jeremy lost his job and could no longer make the payments. Jeremy took the car to Smooth and said he wanted to cancel the contract, and that he wanted his money back. What are the possible outcomes? Compare and contrast potential legal and equitable remedies • Brian McDonald spent his time away from work on his hobby, model trains. His train set was large and consisted of rare and one-of-a-kind trains. One day, while visiting with fellow train hobbyist Harry, Brian said, “When I retire in 2 years from Foodmart, I’m going to sell my trains and spend the rest of my life traveling on real trains.” Brian told Harry that he was the only person he planned to offer his trains to, because he knew Harry would take care of them. Harry said he looked forward to the day when he could buy the trains. Harry spent the next 2 years and most of his savings building a new 2,000-square foot room onto his house to make room for the trains. When Harry told Brian he was building the new room, Brian just smiled. Brian also heard that Harry borrowed money from his aunt to buy the trains. When Brian retired, he sold his trains to his neighbor, James. Harry sued Brian, claiming breach of contract, or in the alternative, for promissory estoppel. Who wins? Explain your answer with respect to both alternative claims. You may assume that there is no Statute of Frauds issue merely because any contract is not in writing.
Note: Please do not attempt to look up this case on the Internet; I want your initial response and subsequent discussion to based on your own analysis and the textbook. I will post the actual opinion in this case at the end of our discussion. Peterson was employed in the Boise, Idaho office of Hewlett-Packard for almost 21 years prior to his termination. The parties do not dispute that Peterson's job performance was satisfactory. The conflict between Peterson and Hewlett-Packard arose when the company began displaying "diversity posters" in its Boise office as one component of its workplace diversity campaign. The first series consisted of five posters, each showing a photograph of a Hewlett-Packard employee above the caption "Black," "Blonde," "Old," "Gay," or "His-panic." Posters in the second series included photographs of the same five employees and a description of the featured employee's personal interests, as well as the slogan "Diversity is Our Strength." Peterson describes himself as a "devout Christian," who believes that homosexual activities violate the commandments contained in the Bible and that he has a duty "to expose evil when confronted with sin." In response to the posters that read "Gay," Peterson posted two Biblical scriptures on an overhead bin in his work cubicle. The scriptures were printed in a typeface large enough to be visible to co-workers, customers, and others who passed through an adjacent corridor. One of Peterson's postings was taken from Corinthians 10:12. The other featured the following passage from Isaiah: The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! For they have rewarded evil unto themselves. Isaiah 3:9 Subsequently, Peterson posted a third scriptural passage. This time he chose the well-known and highly controversial pas-sage from Leviticus: If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be put upon them. Leviticus 20:13 Peterson's direct supervisor removed the scriptural pas-sages after consulting her supervisor and determining that they could be offensive to certain employees, and that the posting of the verses violated Hewlett-Packard's policy prohibiting harassment. Throughout the relevant period, Hewlett-Packard's harassment policy stated as follows: Any comments or conduct relating to a person's race, gender, religion, disability, age, sexual orientation, or ethnic background that fail to respect the dignity and feeling [sic] of the individual are unacceptable. Over the course of several days after Peterson posted the Biblical materials, he attended a series of meetings with Hewlett-Packard managers, during which he and they tried to explain to each other their respective positions. Peterson explained that he meant the passages to communicate a message condemning "gay behavior." The scriptural passages, he said, were "intended to be hurtful. And the reason [they were] intended to be hurtful is you cannot have correction unless people are faced with truth." Peterson hoped that his gay and lesbian co-workers would read the passages, repent, and be saved. In these meetings, Peterson also asserted that Hewlett-Packard's workplace diversity campaign was an initiative to "target" heterosexual and fundamentalist Christian employees at Hewlett-Packard, in general, and him in particular. Ultimately, Peterson and the managers were unable to agree on how to resolve the conflict. Peterson proposed that he would remove the offending scriptural passages if Hewlett-Packard removed the "Gay" posters; if, however, Hewlett-Packard would not remove the posters, he would not remove the pas-sages. When the managers rejected both options, Peterson responded: "I don't see any way that I can compromise what I am doing that would satisfy both [Hewlett-Packard] and my own conscience." He further remonstrated: "as long as [Hewlett-Packard] is condoning [homosexuality] I'm going to oppose it. . . ." Peterson was given time off with pay to reconsider his position. When he returned to work, he again posted the scriptural passages and refused to remove them. After further meetings with Hewlett-Packard managers, Peterson was terminated for insubordination. Following receipt of a right to sue notice from the EEOC, Peterson filed a complaint alleging religious discrimination in violation of Title VII. Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer "to discharge any individual . . . because of such individual's . . . religion[.]" 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1). "The term 'religion' includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee's . . . religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e. What do you think the proper decision should be in this case? Why? Should Hewlett-Packard taken other actions to resolve this matter prior to terminating this long term and satisfactory employee? A written response of at least 350 words would be appropriate.
Ethan began working as a printer at Bilson's Art Studio in 1996. During his employment, Ethan was a good worker, did not create any trouble, and was viewed by management as a "relatively passive personality." In February of 1999, Ethan was physically attacked by another employee, Stan, without provocation. It was not the first time Stan had attacked a coworker. Approximately eight years earlier, Stan had attacked another employee, Vu, inflicting injuries serious enough to require stitches. Both Stan and Vu continued working for Bilson's after that incident. According to Ethan, the incident at issue in this case began when Stan approached Ethan and another worker and started screaming at them. Stan then grabbed a piece of wood and began swinging it at Ethan, possibly hitting him in the arm. Stan then took up either a hammer or a box of screws and hit Ethan with it. At that point, Ethan fled the room, but Stan began following him. When Ethan was about 30 to 40 feet away from Stan, Stan threw a box of screws, hitting Ethan in the back. At that point, Ethan stopped his flight, turned around and saw Stan holding a large metal cap. Ethan then rushed toward Stan, grabbing him in a bear hug in an attempt to restrain him. Stan immediately struck Ethan in the head with the cap, splitting the skin on his scull and causing substantial bleeding. It is undisputed that Ethan did not hit Stan. Jim Goetsch, a member of the family that owns Bilson's, interviewed witnesses, including Ethan, in the wake of the incident. There appears to have been some difference of opinion among the witnesses as to whether Ethan had intended to fight with Stan when he turned back (and just had no opportunity to strike a blow before getting clocked) or merely sought to prevent Stan from pelting him with additional objects. According to Goetsch, Ethan himself initially stated that "he got mad when he got hit with a box of screws and that he went back to fight." After hearing these differing perspectives, Jim Goetsch apparently concluded that Ethan was seeking only to defend himself in the conflict, even when he chose to turn and rush back toward Stan rather than continuing his retreat. Nonetheless, Goetsch decided to fire Ethan after hearing his side of the story, "because he did not continue to leave the scene. . . . He made a decision to go back. And that is not a decision I agreed with." Ethan sued Bilson's Art Studio for wrongful termination in a California court. Bilson's Art Studio is located in California. California law clearly recognizes the right to engage in self defense. California's constitution provides, "All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty...." Additional California's penal code makes clear that "resistance sufficient to prevent a public offense may be made by the party about to be injured." Furthermore, the concept of self-defense under California law "includes the right not to retreat from danger, even if retreat is possible and would be safer." How would you rule in this case? Why?
Tom inherited his father’s landscaping business, and incorporated the business after he read an article in Lawn News, advising landscaping businesses to incorporate. Tom has been sued by a customer, whose prize rose bushes were accidentally damaged by a landscaper employed by Tom’s corporation. This incident occurred subsequent to the formation of the corporation. Tom called his attorney, Hector, to represent him in the lawsuit. When Hector asked for the corporate minutes, Tom said, “What corporate minutes?” Hector advised Tom that his personal assets could be taken if he lost the suit, but Tom said, “No, don’t worry! I’m a corporation; I have no personal liability!” Is Tom correct? Identify and discuss the legal principle that would be applied by a court to resolve this issue, and predict the outcome of the suit against Tom.
Learning Team Assignment: Synopsis of Tort Cases Paper Write a minimum of a 350-word synopsis for each scenario in which you answer the following statements: o Indentify each possible tort action by stating the legal claim and the plaintiff and defendant for the legal claim o Provide an analysis of how each possible tort action will be resolved, which will involve stating the key legal elements of each tort claim and also describing any viable legal defenses that the defendant may have Scenario 1: Daniel and his son Ruben, age 8, go to a football game. The quarterback drops back to throw a pass, and is hit by an opposing player, breaking the quarterback’s arm, and sending the ball into the stands, injuring a fan. The referee calls this an incomplete pass, which upsets Malik, a fan seated next to Ruben. Malik jumps up to yell at the referee, spilling his cold beer on Ruben. Daniel is upset to see Ruben’s enjoyment spoiled this way, and shoves Malik. As Malik falls, he grabs onto the railing, which gives way under his weight. Malik’s face hits the aisle steps, knocking out two of his front teeth. An usher takes Malik to the first aid station. On their way out, Daniel stops at the concession stand to buy two diet soft drinks. A lady standing in line at the concession stand smells the beer on Ruben, and she starts yelling at Daniel, accusing him of giving beer to a child. She makes a huge scene, and several customers cast disgusted glances toward Daniel. One of them is Daniel’s boss, who tells him he does not want anyone working for him who would give alcohol to a child, and that Daniel is fired. Meanwhile, the concession worker gets distracted by the scene in front of him, and accidentally gives Daniel two regular, sugary soft drinks instead of diet drinks. Daniel and Ruben drink the soft drinks as they exit the stadium. Just as Daniel and Ruben arrive at their car, Malik and his wife appear behind them. Malik is pointing a gun at Daniel. The gun is not loaded, but he wants to scare Daniel. Unfortunately, Daniel has a concealed weapon and, believing himself threatened, shoots Malik. Malik’s wife starts screaming and phones for an ambulance and the police. Before the police and ambulance arrive, Daniel slips into a diabetic coma. Scenario 2: Anna orders a meal in an Italian restaurant. After her food is served, she takes a bite and cries out in pain. She has bitten down on a piece of glass. Upon hearing Anna’s cry, another waiter who is pouring wine at a nearby table spins around and bumps into Anna’s waiter, who is carrying a flaming dish. The flaming dish tilts onto Anna’s waiter, and his apron catches fire. He rips it off and casts it aside, where it ignites another tablecloth. People start screaming and run for the door, but because it is a revolving door, only one or two people can leave at a time. An old lady is trampled by the crowd and is seriously injured. Several other patrons suffer smoke inhalation and burns, but finally, everyone is out. When the ambulances and fire engines arrive, Anna is among those transported to the emergency room. Her mouth is bleeding profusely, and she is becoming weak. The emergency room doctor tells Anna that immediate surgery will be necessary to stop the bleeding and save her tooth. She is immediately prepped for surgery. While she is unconscious, the surgeon mistakes her for another patient and amputates her right leg. Scenario 3: Franco is an agent for SureCo, Inc., an independent insurance agency that offers policies from several insurance companies. With the economy in crisis, SureCo is experiencing hard times. The boss tells the agents that if they do not start selling insurance policies, the agency is going to shut down and everyone will be out of a job. Franco needs this job badly, and starts calling his customers to see if he can sell some policies. He calls Raul, and tells Raul that if he increases his coverage at present rates, Franco will guarantee that the premiums will never go up. He tells other customers the same thing, and many take advantage of the offer to increase their coverage and lock in at the present rates. The commissions start rolling in, and the boss is pleased. A year later, when customers get bills for policy renewals, they are irate to see that premiums have gone up. The boss finds out for the first time what Franco has done when she is served with a lawsuit filed by a customer. She yells at Franco, and demands that he clear out his desk. She has security escort Franco out of the building in front of the other agents, who are shocked. When asked by the other agents about what happened, the boss tells them Franco was fired for stealing. Raul decides to get back at the agency, and marches up and down the street in front of the agency with a big sign that says, “SureCo cheats its customers!” The boss cannot let this continue, so she takes a staple gun, goes outside, and fires it in Raul’s direction, hoping to scare him away. Unfortunately, she misses and hits Raul in the eye, causing permanent blindness in that eye. Scenario 4: Randy is a sales clerk at Buy-Mart, a huge discount store. He works in the hardware and gun department. One day, Lee asks to look at a rifle. Randy unlocks the case and hands Lee the rifle he wanted to see. Lee examines the rifle, and tells Randy he will take the rifle and a box of bullets. Randy puts the bullets on the counter, and turns to ring up the transaction. While Randy is not looking, Lee opens the box, loads the rifle, aims, and shoots a lady who is walking with a man in the next aisle. Upon seeing his wife fall, the man clutches at his chest and has a heart attack. Lee aims at someone else, but Randy tackles him and knocks him down, spoiling his shot. The bullet ricochets off a metal beam and injures a boy. Randy and Lee struggle until Randy knocks Lee unconscious. The store security guard comes over and, in the heat of anger, kicks the unconscious Lee in the ribs. Randy can hear Lee’s ribs breaking. Randy and the security guard manage to lock Lee in a storage room until the police come. For some reason, the police do not arrive for two hours. Before they get there, Lee comes to and bangs on the door, saying he needs medical attention. The security guard tells Lee, “Be quiet or I will break more of your ribs.” Lee does not get released from the closet until the police arrive to arrest him.
Hazel is 84, and suffers from debilitating arthritis. Sometimes, she can barely walk. Every time Hazel has been unable to get around, her neighbor Ruth cooks and cleans for her until she feels better. Hazel has offered to pay Ruth, but Ruth always declines. One day when Hazel is feeling well, she and Ruth eat out in a restaurant, and Hazel tells Ruth she is going to leave her $50,000 in her will. Six months later, Hazel dies without leaving a will. Can Ruth successfully sue Hazel’s estate for $50,000? State the legal reasons for your answer. Do not argue that Ruth can’t prove that Hazel made the promise as this question is not about the rules of evidence so assume that every fact stated in the scenario has been proved. If it makes you happier, assume the waiter overheard the promise and will so testify.
After have a full opportunity to examine the subject computer system, Turner entered into a contract withDr. Unger to design and install a billing program for Dr. Unger’s dental practice for a flat fee of $2,000. After entering into the contract with Dr. Unger, Turner subsequently realized that the task would require several more hours of programming effort than she originally anticipated from her pre contract review of the subject computer system, Turner informed Dr. Unger that she could not complete the work for less than $3,000. Dr. Unger reluctantly stated that he would pay the additional $1,000 and confirmed this in writing, but upon completion of the work refused to pay Turner more than $2,000. Is Turner entitled to the remaining $1,000? Hint, if the answer to this question seems complete obvious, then think again.
Wilbur, who has difficulty making up his mind for most of his 29 years, was sitting around on Sunday, with some of his friends. At one point, he says, "I'm going to try to sell my car, and if I can get an offer close to $9,000 I'm going to take it." Andy, one of the friends, thinks to himself that this might be a good deal. The following events occur later that same week. Monday: Wilbur arranges with the local newspaper for an advertisement to run beginning on Saturday, which will say, "1997 Honda Prelude, excellent, 1st $8,000 takes it. See it at 1902 Maple Street." Thursday: Andy delivers a note to Wilbur, which Wilbur reads later on Thursday. The note says, "I'll will take your car for $9,000" and is signed by Andy. Wilbur never responds to this note. Friday: Wilbur thinks he may have underpriced the car and calls the newspaper to cancel or modify his advertisement. It is too late to cancel or modify the advertisement for Saturday's paper and the ad runs on Saturday in the paper as originally stated. A new ad will start on Sunday which does not mention a price but Wilbur expects the car should bring close to $10,000. Saturday: After seeing the ad in the paper, Bob shows up with $8,000 cash in hand to buy the car. Wilbur refuses to sell the car to Bob. Andy and Bob each separately sue Wilbur wanting to force him to sell the car claiming that a contract has been formed. Discuss each case separately and how it might come out, including the arguments the parties would most likely raise. This is a contract law question so I expect your responses to utilize contract law concepts rather than your own personal feelings about the justice or injustice of the situation. Note: Please assume that the Statute of Frauds is not applicable, i.e., no requirement that the contract being in writing.
Individual Assignment: State of Confusion Paper The state of Confusion enacted a statute requiring all trucks and towing trailers that use its highways to use a B-type truck hitch. This hitch is manufactured by only one manufacturer in Confusion. The result of this statute is that any trucker who wants to drive through Confusion must stop and have the new hitch installed, or drive around Confusion. The federal government has not made any attempt to regulate the truck hitches used on the nation’s highways. Tanya Trucker, who owns a trucking company in the state of Denial, is not happy about the additional expense this statute imposes on her business. She intends to file suit against Confusion to overturn the statute.
Paulette is the owner of the Rock On Mobile Home Park. For several years, Albert regularly collected rent for Paulette from the tenants of the mobile home park. Recently, Paulette learned that Albert pocketed some rent he collected, so Paulette fired Albert, and revoked his authority to collect rent payments from tenants. However, neither Paulette nor Albert told any tenants of Albert's termination. Yesterday, Albert went around to Theresa’s mobile home and asked for the rent. Theresa paid Albert the money owed to Paulette. Albert never gave this money to Paulette. Is Theresa liable to pay Paulette? Why or why not? What legal principle did you apply? Discuss an agent’s obligations toward his principal. Your carefully edited response should be a minimum of 350 words and posted to the thread titled "Week Two Discussion Question Three Thread" in the Main forum.
Felix is a school bus driver. He is driving children home from school one day, when he is distracted by a fight in the back of the bus. He turns to see what is happening behind him, and accidentally strikes and kills two twins riding bicycles in the bike lane. One twin is a brain surgeon, and the other is a garbage collector. Each has dependents. Explain how damages will be calculated for each victim, and why the families will collect different amounts. Is this a fair system? Why or why not?Your carefully edited response should be a minimum of 350 words and posted to the thread titled "Week Two Discussion Question Two Thread" in the Main forum.
Mary is cutting weeds at her home. She is unable to trim some weeds she finds, because they grew between the rocks, so she removes the protective guard on the weed trimmer and trims the weeds. There are no warnings on the weed trimmer advising against removing the guard. She hits a rock, which is thrown to the side, hitting her neighbor in the eye and causing permanent damage. What kind of tort claim does the neighbor have? Who are the possible defendants? Your carefully edited response should be a minimum of 350 words and posted to the thread titled "Week Two Discussion Question One Thread" in the Main forum.
Individual Assignment: Business Ethics Case • Read Business Ethics Case 3.5 at the end of Chapter 3 of The Legal Environment of Business and Online Commerce. and the opinion in Calder v. Jones referenced in the case (the opinion is readily available by just Googling “Calder v. Jones). After reading the case and the opinion, answer the following questions in a paper of no more than 750 words and post the paper to Assignments (Ignore the questions in the textbook): Was it ethical for the two individual defendants (other than the National Enquirer) to try to avoid being sued in California? Are the two individual defendants subject to personal jurisdiction in California? Why or why not?
No first week of a law course for business students would be complete without soliciting your evaluation of the judicial merits of the now famous or more aptly put, infamous, McDonalds hot coffee case. In February, 1992, Stella Liebeck, then 79, was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandson's car. He ordered coffee for his grandmother from a McDonalds drive through window. The coffee was served in a lidded Styrofoam cup which the grandson immediately handed to Stella. The grandson drove forward slightly and momentarily halted the car so that Stella could add cream and sugar to her coffee. She placed the coffee cup between her knees and while attempting to remove the lid, the entire cup of coffee spilled into her lap. Although she was wearing sweatpants at the time, she was severely burned suffering 3rd degrees burns on 6% of her body including her thighs, buttocks and genital and groin areas, and spent eight days in the hospital during which she had a number of skin grafts. Stella offered to settle with McDonalds for $20,000 but the offer was rejected by McDonalds. Ultimately, Stella sued McDonalds for negligence, and after an extensive trial, the jury awarded Stella $200,000 in compensatory damages (less $40,000 as the jury found Stella to be 20% at fault) and $2,700,000 in punitive damages (which the judge reduced to $480,000). McDonalds appealed the verdict, but Stella and McDonalds entered into a secret settlement prior to any further judicial action on the matter. Is this case another example of the lunacy and unreality of the American legal system or an illustration of the American legal system's innovative and responsive nature? Why? Please post a well edited response of about 350 words to the thread entitled " Week One Discussion Question Three Thread" in the Main forum. For your information, negligence is classically defined as the omission to do something which a reasonable man would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. For a more legalistic definition of the elements of a cause of action based on negligence, I quote from Cheeseman's Contemporary Business Law (a text I use in another UOP law course), "To be successful in a negligence lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove that (1) the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, (2) the defendant breached this duty of care, (3) the plaintiff suffered injury, and (4) the defendant's negligent act caused the plaintiff's injury." You also can find a very good discussion of negligence in Chapter 5 of your text in the second week of the course.
1) The form of alternative dispute resolution wherein the parties hire someone to review the evidence and make a decision that is binding upon the parties is called A. negotiation B. settlement conference C. conciliation D. arbitration 2) The Federal Trade Commission is an example of A. a federal agency created by the federal government B. a corporation subsidized by the federal government C. a branch of the U.S. Supreme Court D. a temporary commission created by executive order that has become permanent 3) A corporation is considered a citizen of what state? A. The state where the majority of the employees live B. It is not a citizen because it is a business C. The state where it filed its Articles of Incorporation D. The state where the president of the corporation lives 4) The Federal False Claims Act is also known as A. the Sarbanes-Oxley Act B. the Whistleblower Statute C. the Statute of Frauds D. the Statute of Limitations 5) Utilitarianism is a moral theory, which states A. ethics requires a decision-maker to take actions which result in the greatest good to society B. ethics requires following the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you) C. ethics requires actions which use the most efficient tools D. ethics requires acting according to the Bible or some outside source 6) Which of the following statements is true? A. If something is legal, it is always ethical. B. Practices that are legal in the United States are legal everywhere in the world. C. Practices that are ethical in the United States are considered ethical everywhere else in the world. D. A course of action can be legal but not ethical. 7) If a defendant files a motion for summary judgment in a civil case, what is the defendant saying? A. That the plaintiff’s claims are false B. That the court has no jurisdiction to decide the case C. That the case is ready to go to the jury D. That even if what the plaintiff says is true, there is no basis for judgment against the defendant 8) A defendant fails to answer a civil lawsuit, what is likely to happen? A. A court will contact the defendant and ask him to answer the lawsuit. B. The court will grant a default judgment against the defendant. C. The case will be appealed before the court makes a ruling. D. The court will order that the defendant go to jail until he or she agrees to answer. 9) The legal authority of a court to make orders that are binding upon the parties is called A. in rem jurisdiction B. personal jurisdiction C. quasi in rem jurisdiction D. enumerated jurisdiction 10) Harry Hoosier, an Indiana resident, drives his family to Florida for spring vacation. When he is at a red light, Freddie Floridian, a Florida resident, is unable to stop in time and his vehicle impacts Harry’s car from the rear. No one is hurt and Harry’s vehicle suffers approximately $10,000 in damages. Which is correct? A. Harry can sue Freddie in federal court in Florida but not in Indiana. B. Harry can sue Freddie in state court in Florida or Indiana. C. Harry can sue Freddie in state court but not federal court in Florida but not in Indiana. D. Harry can sue Freddie in state court but not federal court in Florida or Indiana.