Business Law cases chapter 1-6
McCollum V. CBS, inc (1988)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's granting of the defendant's demurrer, reasoning that since no rational person would interpret musical lyrics advocating suicide as anything other than figurative expressions, and because musical lyrics are speech enjoying pretty strong protection under the First Amendment, the defendant who publishes music containing such lyrics cannot be found legally liable for a music consumer's suicide.
Cole v. Quirk (2001)
The case in which the Massachusetts Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's granting of a motion for a directed verdict in a negligence case involving a pair of surgical tweezers that had been left by defendant in a used car, upon which plaintiff cut himself as he was cleaning out the car. The court of appeals ruled that the plaintiff had failed to show actual injury that was not speculative.
Tennant v. Advance Machine company, inc (1984)
The case in which the Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's award of $100,000 compensatory plus $400,000 punitive damages against defendant who snuck into plaintiff's California trash dumpster at night and retrieved documents that gave them a competitive advantage over plaintiff. Case was tried under California law in Minnesota courts because plaintiff and defendant were both Minnesota corporations, but the wrongful acts had occurred in California.
Gardner v. Meiling (1977)
The case in which the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that seller's false statements about the monthly gross income of the tavern cannot be used as a basis to rescind a contract for the purchase of the tavern because the statements were made after buyer had entered the contract. Because of the timing, there cannot have been actual reliance by buyer on the statements.
Mason v. Chrysler Corporation (1995)
The case in which the Supreme Court of Alabama ruled that the expressions "luxurious," "quality-engineered," and "reliable" used in advertisements for a car were not actionable statements of facts about the car for purposes of suing for fraud or deceit, but were mere sales puffery, a special class of opinions.
Agis v. Howard Johnson (1976)
The case in which the Supreme Court of Massachusetts reversed and remanded a trial court's granting of summary judgment for the defendant against plaintiff's claim that firing her because her name started with "A" as part of a plan to force a thief to identify herself constituted intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Sunderhaus v. Perel & Lowenstein (1965)
The case in which the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that a company's representation to a buyer that a ring was "worth at least its purchase price" is an actionable statement of fact in an action for fraud because of the superior knowledge of the seller regarding diamond valuation.
Wickard V. Filburn
The case in which the U.S. Supreme Court applied the Substantial Effect Rule and the Aggregation Argument to uphold the federal government's right to tell a farmer in Ohio how much wheat he can grow on his land each year, even when that wheat never leaves the state.
Wickard Vs Filburn 1942
The case in which the U.S. Supreme Court applied the Substantial Effect Rule and the Aggregation Argument to uphold the federal government's right to tell a farmer in Ohio how much wheat he can grow on his land each year, even when that wheat never leaves the state.
Gibbons Vs OGDEN (1824)
The case in which the U.S. Supreme Court created the Substantial Effect Rule: Congress may regulate any activity that substantially affects interstate commerce, even if the activity itself is intrastate.
Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988)
The case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a cartoon of a noted evangelist leader fornicating drunk in an outhouse with his mother was deemed not actionable for defamation because the parody was so outrageous it could not "reasonably be understood as describing actual facts" about the leader, or events in which he had actually participated.
Heart of Atlanta Motel V. United States (1964)
The case in which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the permanent injunction issued by the district court below it, which required the motel to admit Blacks as guests under the authority of Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Li. V. yellow cab company of California 1975
California Supreme Court ruled that plaintiff is not barred from recovering at least part of her damages from defendant even though her lack of caution in turning left mid-block to cross three lanes of oncoming traffic was a proximate cause of her injury. Effectively overturned the contributory negligence doctrine in California, replacing it with a doctrine of pure comparative negligence.
Ratcliffe v. Pederson (1975)
Case in which the California Supreme Court held that a case brought in California against a businessman domiciled in Idaho could go forward, because the defendant had used California's channels of commerce to sell more than 400 foreign made motorcycles in the state, and thereby the contitutionally required minimum contacts test was met.
Nally v. Grace Community Church of the valley (1988)
Case in which the California Supreme Court ruled that the trial court's granting of a motion for a nonsuit was proper, because California law does not impose the duty on non-therapist counselors that would be necessary for plaintiff to have a valid cause of action.
International Shoe v. Washington (1945)
Case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that in order for a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant in a manner consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the defendant must have minimum contacts with the forum state such that it would be fair to force the defendant to defend a lawsuit there.
Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc v. Shute (1991)
Case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs would have to travel from Washington state to Florida if they wished to sue the defendant, because the defendant had included a forum selection clause on the back of the plaintiffs' ticket and that clause did not seem constitutionally unfair.
Butterfield v. Forrester (1809)
Plaintiff sued defendant for negligently placing a pole across a public road, which pole plaintiff ran into at high speed on a horse at dusk, injuring himself. The court declared the defendant not liable on the grounds of the contributory negligence of the plaintiff in the form of riding his horse at an unwisely high speed for that time of day.
Brown V. Board of Education (1954)
Supreme Court decision that unanimously overturned the "Separate but Equal" doctrine, declaring that separate schools for blacks and whites are inherently unequal, and therefore a violation of the black students' Fourteenth Amendment protection against unequal protection under the laws.
Plessy V. Ferguson (1896)
The Supreme Court decision that established the "Separate but Equal" doctrine. Upheld a state law requiring separate railcars for black and white passengers.
Lemle v. Breedon
The Supreme Court of Hawaii ruled that plaintiff was indeed entitled to a return of $1,190 paid to rent a six bedroom Tahitian style house, as the trial court had correctly determined, because the house was not fit for use as a residence owing to a rat infestation.
Okun v. Morton (1988)
The case in which California Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's award of $354,325 in compensatory and punitive damages on the grounds that plaintiff did not prove he had been influenced in his decision to contract by defendant's failure to inform him of his pre-existing agreement with a London partner regarding a trademark prior to starting a restaurant with him.
Palsgraf v. Long island railroad company (1928)
The case in which New York's supreme court reversed the finding of both the trial court and the intermediate court of appeals, ruling that the railroad was not liable for the injuries a woman sustained while waiting on a train platform because they were of a type that would not be foreseeable to a reasonable person in the position of the two railroad employees involved, who were merely trying to help a man board a moving train some 100 feet away.
Hellman v. La Cumbre golf and country club (1992)
The case in which the California Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment of the trial court that plaintiffs had failed to prove that the five to ten stray golf balls per week that accidentally fall onto their property from an adjacent golf course constitutes an actionable nuisance, or that defendants' use of their property is unreasonable.
Miller v. National Broadcast company (1986)
The case in which the California Court of Appeal reversed and remanded the trial court's granting of summary judgment for defendant in an invasion of privacy lawsuit brought against a television station that had sent its camera crew into the home of a man suffering a heart attack without his permission as part of a t.v. special about the work of paramedics.
Grimshaw V. Ford Motor company (1981)
The case in which the California Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's award of $2,516,000 in compensatory plus $3.5 million in punitive damages because plaintiff was severely burned when the car he was riding in, built by the defendant, was rear-ended at relatively low speed. Evidence uncovered at trial indicated the defendant had made a conscious decision not to fix the vulnerability of the car to low speed rear-end collisions to protect profits, even though the problem could be fixed for as little as $4 to $8 per car.
Doe V. Roe (1990)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's award of $150,000 damages to his former girlfriend for his failure to warn her he had herpes, together with his failure to protect against the transmission of herpes to her during intercourse.
Andrew V. Wells, et al (1988)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's granting of summary judgment for the defendant, who while working as a bartender, was asked by an intoxicated customer with whom he was acquainted whether he could arrange a ride home for the man, which he did not do. Shortly after making this request, the man left the bar and was struck and killed by a motor vehicle as he attempted to cross a road. Plaintiff was the decedent's father, who had sued for negligence and wrongful death.
Mashburn v. Collin (1977)
The case in which the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that the contents of an unfavorable restaurant review were not actionable defamation because a reasonable reader would understand the statements it contained to be no more than "rhetorical hyperbole" designed to make clear to the reader that the reviewer very much disliked the food.
California Auto Court Association, Inc. v. Cohn et al (1950)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals overruled the demurrer granted by the trial court, and remanded the case back to the trial court with instructions to put the defendants thereby allowed to escape the lawsuit back into the lawsuit and allow the plaintiff to continue their lawsuit. Plaintiff alleges tortious interference with his listing agreement by defendants, who bought a motel directly from a co-defendant, causing the co-defendant to breach his contract with plaintiff, and costing plaintiff a $3,900 sales commission on the sale.
Albertini v. Schaeder ( 1979)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals reversed a Los Angeles trial court's granting of summary judgment for the defendant, and remanded the case back to the trial court for further consideration, arguing that the facts alleged by the plaintiff might constitute defamation under California law. Plaintiff, the president of a corporation providing computer programming services for lawyers, alleged that defendant, the president of a competing corporation, had orally stated in the presence of others that plaintiff was a "crook" and a "thief" and that plaintiff's company was a "scam" corporation.
Barouh V. Haberman (1994)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a not liable verdict for battery on the grounds that the jury was improperly or incompletely instructed regarding the meaning of the expression "unlawful contact." Plaintiff accused defendant of striking him a "blow" to his head from behind in a restaurant, which has caused him to experience tinnitus and other problems. Defendant described the contact as a "love tap."
Catsouras v. Department of California Highway Patrol (2010)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a trial court's dismissal of a public disclosure of private facts case in which photos of a young woman who had been decapitated in an auto accident were used in Internet-based public safety messages without her family's permission.
Huang v. Garner (1984)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a trial court's granting of a motion for a nonsuit on plaintiff's claim of negligence per se for an apartment building they purchased in 1974 which they allege was defective in violation of the 1961 Uniform Building Code.
Lowell v. Mother's Cake and cookie company (1978)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the trial court's dismissal of a lawsuit brought by a trucking company against a client that announced it would not transfer its service contract to the new owner of the trucking company, then purchased that trucking company itself at a deep discount from its true market value.
Eastwood v. superior courts (1983)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the trial court's granting of a demurrer filed by defendant, holding that a newspaper's use of petitioner's likeness to promote an article containing false information about his love life could have infringed plaintiff's legally-protected right of publicity because while the statute does state that "no cause of action will lie for the publication of matters in the public interest, which rests on the right of the public to know and the freedom of the press to tell it," this qualified privilege has never applied to the publication of news known to be false, or published with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity.
Fairfield v. American photocopy Equipment (1955)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the trial court's granting of a motion for a nonsuit filed by defendant. Defendant listed plaintiff's name in a list of "satisfied users" of his "Apeco Systematic Auto-Stat" copy machine, which he distributed widely (30,000 copies), even though plaintiff was not a satisfied user of that machine and defendant knew or should have known this.
Appel et al. v. Burman et al (1984)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's award of $49,901 to plaintiff for defendant's slander to plaintiff's title which was made to delay plaintiff's construction of a lawful home addition that defendant didn't want for privacy reasons.
Montana v. san jose mercury news (1995)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's granting of summary judgment for the defendant, dismissing plaintiff's claims against a newspaper alleging commercial appropriation of his name and likeness on First Amendment grounds, noting that the relevant statute states that "no cause of action will lie for the publication of matters in the public interest, which rests on the right of the public to know and the freedom of the press to tell it."
Easton v. Strassburger (1984)
The case in which the California Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's order that the defendant, a licensed California real estate broker, pay the plaintiff, a homebuyer, $197,000 for failing to warn her of telltale signs that the property she was about to buy may have been built on improperly compacted or otherwise unstable soil.
Luthringer v. Moore (1948)
The case in which the California Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment of $10,000 awarded to plaintiff for defendant's negligent application of hydrocyanic acid gas for the extermination of cockroaches which resulted in an employee being injured.
Hydrotech Systems, LTD v Oasis Waterpark (1991)
The case in which the California Supreme Court held that a New York corporation was barred from collecting the $110,000 they claimed they were owed because at least some of the services they offered were contractor's services, yet they lacked the California contractor's license required to legally offer or perform such services.
Poggi v. Scott (1914)
The case in which the California Supreme Court reversed and remanded the trial court's granting of a nonsuit in a case for conversion involving a property owner's accidental sale of a tenant's wine barrels full of wine to some imposters.
Greenman v. Yuba Power products, inc. (1963)
The case in which the California Supreme Court upheld the trial court's finding that the manufacturer of a combination drill-saw-lathe was liable for the injuries sustained by a customer while using the product, and emphasized that such liability was so-called "strict liability."
Vokes v. Arthur Murray, inc (1968)
The case in which the Florida Court of Appeals ruled that seller's representations about buyer's natural dancing ability and degree of improvement were actionable statements of fact in an action for fraud because of the superior knowledge of the seller regarding such matters.
