Business Law - Final Word Problems

Bob was driving 70 mph when he was pulled over by the state highway patrol. The last speed sign Bob had seen said 70 mph. The patrolman admitted that a nearer sign indicating a 55 mph limit had been blown down recently. Nonetheless, he wrote Bob a ticket. Why?

The state highway patrolman wrote Bob a ticket because Bob was speeding, even if he didn't know or didn't intend to. Ignorance is not a defense, so Bob should've known that the speed limit changes.

When it became clear that Dean's parents needed someone to live in & help care for them, Dean offered to do it. Within a month after moving in, he told his parents that he would continue to stay only if they signed all the real estate over to him & give him power of attorney on their bank accounts. Within four months after they did this, Dean put his parents in a nursing home. Could this be considered undue influence? Could there be cause for duress in this situation?

This could be considered undue influence because Dean's parents could no longer be on their own so they had to do whatever Dean wanted to survive, essentially. There could be cause for duress in this situation since his demands unfairly had to be met.

Nick wants to enter a car in the demolition derby at the local fair this year. Nick's uncle tells him that he will give him $500 & pay for his expenses in entering the car if he wins first place. Nick wins the competition, but his uncle refuses to keep his promise. Would the promise to Nick be enforceable under the doctrine of promissory estoppel?

Yes, it would be enforceable under the doctrine of promissory estoppel because he was relying on that promise, a reasonable person would rely on that that promise, & his neglect will hurt Nick financially.

Mark owes Consuelo $800, which he is to pay back in six months. Mark cannot pay the full amount, but he can pay Consuelo $650 right away. Is there valid consideration for both parties? Why or why not?

Yes, there is valid consideration for both parties. Mark gets to pay $150 less while Consuelo gets his money right away.

Ms. Tant of New York City recently sued Mr. Bloom, also of New York City. She claimed that he had run into & injured her while he was jogging. She asked for $50,000 in damages. When she filed her suit in federal district court, Mr. Bloom's attorney immediately objected on two grounds. What were they?

1. He objected on going to federal district court because the amount in damages wasn't large enough. 2. He also objected on going to federal district court because Mr. Bloom & Ms. Tant were both from the same state.

Dick had a verbal agreement with the Jones brothers to repair the barn for a specified amount. The agreement was for half the money to be paid up front so supplies could be purchased & the other half to be paid when the work was finished. After one week of work, the Jones brothers never returned. Is a verbal agreement a binding contract? Why or why not?

A verbal agreement is a binding contract in this situation since, to a reasonable person, the agreement sounded genuine. Also, part of the money was already paid, making it a binding contract.

Joe made an agreement with Fred to steal Joe's truck & set it afire in order to collect the insurance. The agreement was that Joe would pay Fred $500 up front & the balance of $1,500 after Joe collected the insurance. However, when the truck was taken, Joe called the police & had Fred arrested for auto theft & claimed that the $500 was in the truck when it was stolen. Can Fred sue Joe to keep the $500?

Fred can't sue Joe because their first agreement was illegal, making it void. Therefore, Joe gets to keep his truck & the $500, & neither one of them could sue each other.

What is the major difference between intentional torts & negligence & strict liability?

Intentional torts occur when the defendant purposely caused an injury or an act. Negligence & strict liability occur when there was no intent to the injury or the act.

Joel & Jerry attempted to shoplift a gold necklace from a jewelry store. A cashier noticed their suspicious behavior & calle the police. Joel became frightened & admitted to the police that he had tried to steal the necklace for his girlfriend. Jerry would say nothing when he was questioned. What does Jerry know that Joel doesn't?

Jerry knows about his constitutional rights, specifically his fifth amendment rights. The fifth amendment states that you don't have to be a witness or testify against yourself. This means that you have the right to remain silent.

Sharon was driving down a street when she failed to stop at a red traffic light. Seeing a police car approaching in her rearview mirror, she speeded up to avoid being caught. She then lost control of her car & crashed into another car What types of law has Sharon violated & what penalties & damages might she face?

Sharon has violated two criminal laws & one civil law. By running a red light & trying to escape from police, she has violated the two criminal laws. By crashing into another car, she has violated civil law by causing damage to another person's property. Sharon can be faced with paying a fine, restitution, & possibly imprisonment.

Ling's mother sells jewelry. Ling took the catalog to high school, & her friend Randi ordered $200 worth of merchandise. When the merchandise was delivered, Randi didn't have the money to pay. Can she be forced to pay?

Since Randi is more than likely a minor since she is still in high school, she cannot be forced to pay because minors don't have full contractual capacity. Minors, the intoxicated, & the mentally ill all fall under contractual incapacity.

The Smiths are going on a cruise for their fiftieth wedding anniversary. They live near a college campus were Craig attends classes. Mr. Smith asks Craig if he will stay in their home for the two months they will be away. Craig accepts the offer in order to save the two months' board he would have paid to the college. Is there consideration for both parties? Is the contract enforceable?

Yes, there is consideration for both parties, making the contract enforceable. The Smiths won't have to worry about something happening to their house since someone is watching it. Craig benefits because he will save money by not having to pay his two months' board.

Suppose your city council wants to use tax money to build a sports stadium for its professional football team. You prepare a brochure listing your objections to the plan. You & a group of friends are standing on the street handing out the brochures when you are taken into custody by city police. Your literature is confiscated, you are fined $5,000, & you are told not to discuss the issue with your friends again. Which of the Bill of Rights have been violated in your situation?

1. The 4th Amendment is violated because you have to right to be secure in your papers & property from unreasonable seizures without a warrant. 2. The 8th Amendment is violated because you have the right to not receive excessive bail. 3. The 1st Amendment is violated because you have to right to freedom of speech, meaning they can't keep or punish you for discussing this issue with your friends again.

Carl went to the local bar after work & spent the rest of the evening drinking. When he started to go home, he discovered that his truck had a flat tire. When Fred saw his problem, he offered to help change the tire for him. But Carl was so irritated that he told Fred he could have the truck for $10. Fred gave Carl a ten-dollar bill & a ride home. When Carl couldn't find his truck the next day, Carl reported his truck stolen. Can legal action be taken against Fred?

Legal action could be taken against Fred since he knew that Carl had contractual incapacity but still decided to contract with him. If Carl can prove he was intoxicated, he could probably get his truck & his $10 back.

Mary received a citation for failing to remove the snow from the sidewalk in front of her dress shop. The fine was $60. Mary thought the citation was unfair because she did not have enough time to shovel the snow. She received the citation five hours after the snowstorm ended. In court she protested & asked for a jury trial. When she was told that the matter would be heard only by a judge, she said her constitutional rights to a trial by jury in criminal matters was being violated. Is she right?

Mary isn't correct because the fine is not a large enough amount for a jury to be involved. Since it was only an infraction, only a judge would need to hear her case.

What is the difference between compensatory & punitive damages?

Punitive damages are awarded to the victim with the monetary amount high enough to affect & punish the defendant. Compensatory damages are just the actual damages awarded to the victim.

Rosa shot a burglar in her home when he was about to enter her bedroom with a knife in his hand. What would be a good defense for her?

Self-defense would be a good defense for Rosa. Since the burglar had a knife in his hand, it means that he intended to cause harm. Since Rosa could be harmed, she needed to protect herself.

Susan was driving friends to a concert. It was 8 P.M. & the concert began at 8:30 P.M. Because her friends still needed to pick their tickets up at the will call window, they started pressuring her to drive faster than the speed limit. She refused & said, "I just don't want to take a chance on getting a ticket." Is Susan using consequential reasoning or reasoning based on ethical rules here?

Susan is using consequence-based reasoning because she is considering what could happen if she were to get caught. If she obeys the law, no bad consequences will result because of her decision.