30 Jan Is that fair to Little Big

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 1 Discussion

PART 1: Introduce yourself to your fellow students and instructor. Share your college degree plans, briefly explaining what degree you are pursuing, why, and how you think taking this course will assist you in achieving your personal or professional goals.

PART 2: Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution provides that the President must “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Presidents have used this authority to issue Executive Orders which are orders to federal agencies that are part of the Executive Branch and which contain detailed instructions on how laws enacted by Congress should be carried out.

Does this provision of the Constitution allow a President to issue Executive Orders that directs federal agencies NOT to enforce specific laws that have been enacted by Congress? Has any President ever issued an Executive Order that told a federal agency not to enforce a law?

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 2 Discussion

According to Fortune magazine, in 1978, chief executive officers (CEOs) of major American corporations earned 30 times the average earnings of the employees of the corporations that they ran. In 2016, CEOs earned 276 times the average earnings of the employees of the corporations that they ran.

Do corporations have ethically responsibilities to their employees that suggest that this kind of CEO compensation is improper? Do corporations have ethical responsibilities to their customers to control CEO compensation?

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 3 Discussion

A Baltimore artist named Frederick Bouchat designed what the Baltimore Ravens adopted as their first logo, but the team used the design from 1996 to 1998 without compensating or crediting Bouchat. Bouchat successfully sued the team for copyright infringement for using his logo, and the Ravens switched to their current logo after the 1998 season.

Despite the Baltimore Ravens changing the logo design, Bouchat sued the Baltimore Ravens again, claiming that the Baltimore Ravens continued to use the original logo that he had designed after he won the first suit. Specifically, Bouchart complained that the logo he designed still appeared in highlight reels that were played in the Baltimore Ravens’ stadium.

A United States District Court Judge dismissed the second suit filed by Bouchat on the grounds that the appearance of the Bouchat logo in highlight reels was allowable under the “fair use doctrine”.

Bouchat appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that court agreed with the lower court, saying that the “fleeting and insubstantial” appearance of the logo in the videos and photos did not amount to copyright infringement. “Society’s interest in ensuring the creation of transformative works incidentally utilizing copyrighted material is legitimate no matter who the defendant may be,” the court wrote.

What is the “fair use doctrine” and what interests are the “fair use doctrine” intended to protect? How does the “fair use doctrine” apply to the Bouchat case?

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 4 Discussion

Susan, a wealthy widow, invited an acquaintance, John, to her home for dinner on a specific date at a specific time. John told Susan that he would be delighted to come to dinner and, eager to impress Susan, spent lavishly in preparing for the evening. His purchases included a new blazer, new shoes, and expensive floral arrangement, and champagne as gifts for Susan.

At the agreed upon time, John arrived at Susan’s house only to find that she had left for the evening. John went home and sent Susan an email saying that he came for dinner but she was not home. The next day Susan sent Jonathan an email saying that she was sorry that she had forgotten the dinner and had gone to the theater with friends.

Assume that the facts given are admitted and not in dispute.

John wants to sue Susan to recover damages. Can he? Are all of the elements of a contract present in this case? Is there consideration? Don’t be distracted by the silliness of the situation. Concentrate on the questions related to contract.

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 5 Discussion

Charles was a farmer who farmed 600 acres of land. Charles entered into a hand-shake contract with 4H Grain Company. The agreement called for Charles to sell 20,000 bushels of corn to 4H in October, when Charles’ corn crop would be harvested. The agreed price was to be $1.00 per bushel or $20,000. That amount was to be paid to Charles when he delivered the corn to 4H.

Unfortunately, there was a rain storm during the summer that damaged Charles’ corn crop, and part of the corn crop failed. Because of that failure, Charles was only able to offer 9,000 bushels of corn to 4H in October. 4H refused the offer of part of the amount that was to be delivered by Charles and sued Charles for breach of contract to deliver corn. There is nothing in the contract that addresses this situation.

Assume that the facts given are admitted and not in dispute.

Is there anything that Charles can do to avoid breaching the contract? Does Charles have any defenses to breach of this contract? Who should win? Why?

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 6 Discussion

Billy ordered two rooms of furniture from Rooms-To-Go. Billy paid the full price of both rooms. When Rooms-To-Go delivered the furniture to Billy, he said that he could only take one room of the furniture and asked Rooms-To-Go to take the other room of furniture back to their warehouse until he could take that room of furniture. Rooms-To-Go agreed to do that and placed the other room of furniture that Billy ordered and paid for in its warehouse. While the furniture was in the Rooms-To-Go warehouse, it was destroyed by fire. Billy asked Rooms-To-Go to refund the money that he paid for the furniture that was destroyed by fire, but Rooms-To-Go refused, claiming that the risk of loss was on Billy since he was the owner of the furniture that was destroyed by fire.

Does Rooms-To-Go owe Billy the money for the furniture destroyed by fire or is Billy out of luck?

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 7 Discussion

Little Big Corporation hired Stuart as a delivery driver. Before Stuart was hired, the personnel director of Big Little Corporation not only interviewed Stuart and asked him about his driving record and the status of his driver’s license, but the personnel director also obtained an official driving record for Stuart and talked with Stuart’s former employer specifically about Stuart’s driving record. There was no indication from the interview with Stuart, from his driving record, or from Stuart’s previous employer that Stuart was an unsafe driver.

When Stuart was hired by Little Big Corporation, he was thoroughly trained in the operation of the delivery truck that he would be driving and provided an employee safety manual which he was required to (and did) read.

For seven years, Stuart worked as a delivery driver for Little Big Corporation without any accidents or problems. In Stuart’s eighth year as a delivery driver for Little Big Corporation, while making a delivery, he was distracted by something in the cab of his delivery truck, ran a stop sign and hit the car that was being driven by Peggy. Peggy suffered a broken leg and her car was badly damaged.

Peggy sued Stuart and Little Big Corporation for her injuries and damage, and she was awarded damages against Stuart and Little Big Corporation. Little Big Corporation was considered to be fully responsible for these damages under the doctrine of respondeat superior.

Is that fair to Little Big Corporation? What is accomplished by making an employer liable for the actions of their employees if the employer has done everything within reason to make sure that its employees are qualified and trained to do their jobs safely?

BBA3210 Business Law

Unit 8 Discussion

Bob operated a flower shop as a sole proprietorship and decided to formalize the operation of the flower shop, so he formed a limited liability company (LLC) to own and operate the flower shop. After the LLC was formed, the LLC hired David to drive the delivery van that was owned by the LLC and that was used to deliver flowers to customers of the LLC. One day when David was delivering flowers for the flower shop using the van, he ran a red light and collided with a car driven by Jan, causing injuries to Jan and damages to her car.

Who can Jan sue for the injuries that she received in that accident? Are there theories of recovery that Jan can assert that might make Bob liable? What facts would be necessary for Bob to be liable to Jan?