MGMT 520 Midterm Exam 2TCO B. Infuriated when Harry Reid is re-elected during
the 2010 fall election, the Republicans in Congress decide to take matters into
their own hands. In 2011, the House of Representatives passes a new
“Freedom isn’t Free Act” that requires that anyone who wants to vote
in the 2012 presidential election must prove that they paid at least $200 in
federal income tax in the past year, including people aged 18 (who typically
are deducted on their parents’ returns and do not pay income tax). Anyone who
received the “earned income credit” is barred from voting unless they
return the payment from the government. Proof of payment of the tax can be made
by showing a copy of the prior year’s W2, a copy of the prior year’s tax
return, or a signed statement from the IRS stating that the payment of more
than $200 in federal income tax has been made. Citizens who do not pay taxes
can still vote if they donate $200.00 to the federal government as voluntary
income tax and get a statement from the IRS that they have done so. The law
sunsets on December 31, 2012. List two bases under which someone impacted by
this law could argue to have the law overturned.
TCO F. When Vanna White sued Samsung for appropriation
and under the Lanham Act, she won her case under the California common law
right of publicity claim and under the Lanham Act. List the eight Sleekcraft
factors that are required to prove a Lanham Act complaint.
(TCO C)Bud Johnson owns a General Motors dealership in
Pierre, South Dakota. At the request and expense of General Motors, Bud
traveled to Phoenix, Arizona, for purposes of the demonstration of a new
vehicle called the Roughrider, designed to compete against the current offering
of SUVs. Bud went to the proving grounds in the desert around Phoenix and spent
a day watching the vehicle demonstrations. Bud and other dealers drove the
vehicles, and much dust resulted from their driving. A few weeks later, Bud
became ill with flu-like symptoms. He was finally diagnosed as having
coccidioidomycosis or “valley fever.” Valley fever is a disease well
known to Arizona residents, and most have had it if they have lived there over
10 years. Newcomers are particularly vulnerable to the disease because the
exposure to dust seems to build up immunity among the residents.

Bud became quite ill and brought suit against the car manufacturer that invited
him for its failure to warn him about the valley fever phenomenon before he
came out to the testing grounds. Answer the following questions, and use cases
and theories from the text to support your arguments:

Was there negligence in the failure of General Motors to warn Bud? (15 points)

Discuss all defenses General Motors may have. (15 points)

Does strict liability in torts apply to this situation? Why or why not? (10
points)
TCO D: Barney and his 16-year-old son BamBam are riding
in Fred’s car. Fred had taken some prescription medication that morning that
stated on the bottle, “Warning, may cause drowsiness.” The truck in
front of them suffers a blow-out, and swerves uncontrollably. The tire remnants
fly into the road, Fred swerves and hits a car to his left. He avoids hitting
the truck with the blow-out but suffers damage to the left side of his car.
BamBam hits his head on the side of the car, getting a concussion and
permanently losing the sight in his right eye. Fred has state law required auto
insurance with the minimum policy limits.
Fred’s wife, Wilma,
immediately calls Betty, BamBam’s mom, and apologizes when she finds out about
BamBam losing his eye. Wilma says to Betty, “Please don’t worry. We will
pay for anything the insurance doesn’t cover, including the loss of BamBam’s
sight and anything else he needs to recover and live a normal life.” Betty
sobs and says, “You are too good to us. We can’t accept that.” Wilma
says, “Of course you can.” Betty cries harder and says, “Thank
you so much but (unintelligible)” and hangs up.
Fred and Wilma own a
house worth $450,000, a car worth $20,000, a full-size T. rex skeleton for
which a museum has offered $200,000 in the past, and some stocks and bonds
worth $700,000.
A lawsuit ensues and
a judgment against Fred and for BamBam is entered for $300,000. The insurance
company paid their cap of $250,000, leaving $50,000 remaining due. Fred and
Wilma immediately pay BamBam $50,000. Further, Wilma buys a designer eye-patch
for BamBam made specifically by Calvin Klein with a picture of Fred and Wilma’s
daughter, Pebbles, on it. Wilma hugs BamBam when she brings over his new eye
patch and says, “Anything. Anything you need. We will take care of it for
you.” Fred rolls his eyes at Barney, and Barney sighs and shakes his head.
Betty and Wilma both cry at how adorable BamBam looks with his new eye patch.
Barney buys BamBam a new car, specially designed for people with one eye. Wilma
finds out and calls Betty, asking how much the car was. Betty says they are
making payments on the car of $450/month for the next 4 years. Wilma writes
Betty a check for $450, and sends her one every month for the next 8 months.
Eight months after
the judgment was rendered, BamBam is discovered to have more damage to his head
than originally thought. He loses sight in his other eye and now is totally
blind. BamBam’s parents sue Fred and Wilma again for personal injury, but the
case is thrown out as the first case already decided the injury case. Fred
refuses to pay more to BamBam, and he takes the checkbook away from Wilma when
he discovers she’s been making BamBam’s car payments. The two families stop
speaking to each other. BamBam throws away his now useless eyepatch and becomes
despondent. His dreams of being a drag racer seem to be over. BamBam’s attorney
refiles the case, this time on grounds that Wilma’s statement to Betty was a
binding contract that requires that Wilma pay any remaining damages to BamBam,
for the remainder of his life.
Was Wilma’s statement
a binding contract? Using the law of contracts, explain why or why not. Does
BamBam’s age have anything to do with your answer? Can Fred be bound by the
potential contract Wilma may have entered into? Use the law of agency to
explain your answer to that question. Did Wilma’s purchase of the eye-patch
give BamBam a greater leg to stand on in court? What about the car payments she
made? Explain fully your answer to these questions.
TCO I. Marianne Jennings wrote an article, “Why an
International Code of Ethics would be good,” which was assigned to be read
at the beginning of the course. As you have worked throughout this session, you
should have considered this article and how it may or may not have impacted
different situations in the world economic/business/legal/political
environments. The essay you will write on the next question should show that
you have read Marianne’s article and can apply her theories and thoughts from
that article to the scenario provided. Feel free to rely on the information you
know about the situations (if real) or analogize to another one, if you wish.
Include in your answer at least two specific concepts from Marianne’s article,
and apply those concepts to your reasoning in your answer. You will be graded
on your knowledge of the article as well as the application of ethical theories
to international situations.
An oil travesty has
occurred. In the Gulf Coast, British Petroleum’s deep-sea oil well has had a
major malfunction and has exploded. The explosion killed many oil workers. The
oil well began spewing oil into the Gulf, and now the entire southern portion
of the United States coastal areas has been destroyed.
BP initially came out
with advertisements using the CEO of the company apologizing and promising to
make this right for the citizens of the United States. Then, the CEO was
removed by BP from working the disaster. The crisis continues. Based on the
“timing” of the crisis and resolutions that have occurred at the time
of your exam, answer the following question using the most relevant facts you
know.
Using Marianne
Jenning’s article, would an international code of ethics have assisted with the
handling of this crisis? Would it have helped BP avoid this crisis? Do you see
this as an ethical issue? Support your answer with concepts from her article,
as well as other ethical reasons.
TCO A. Use the fact pattern you received in the above
Marianne Jennings “International Code of Ethics” question to answer
this question. Analyze and propose a solution to the problem you received above
using the Blanchard and Peale method. Show the steps, apply the facts, and
provide a proposed solution you would suggestTCO B. Infuriated when Harry Reid is re-elected during
the 2010 fall election, the Republicans in Congress decide to take matters into
their own hands. In 2011, the House of Representatives passes a new
“Freedom isn’t Free Act” that requires that anyone who wants to vote
in the 2012 presidential election must prove that they paid at least $200 in
federal income tax in the past year, including people aged 18 (who typically
are deducted on their parents’ returns and do not pay income tax). Anyone who
received the “earned income credit” is barred from voting unless they
return the payment from the government. Proof of payment of the tax can be made
by showing a copy of the prior year’s W2, a copy of the prior year’s tax
return, or a signed statement from the IRS stating that the payment of more
than $200 in federal income tax has been made. Citizens who do not pay taxes
can still vote if they donate $200.00 to the federal government as voluntary
income tax and get a statement from the IRS that they have done so. The law
sunsets on December 31, 2012. List two bases under which someone impacted by
this law could argue to have the law overturned.TCO F. When Vanna White sued Samsung for appropriation
and under the Lanham Act, she won her case under the California common law
right of publicity claim and under the Lanham Act. List the eight Sleekcraft
factors that are required to prove a Lanham Act complaint.(TCO C)Bud Johnson owns a General Motors dealership in
Pierre, South Dakota. At the request and expense of General Motors, Bud
traveled to Phoenix, Arizona, for purposes of the demonstration of a new
vehicle called the Roughrider, designed to compete against the current offering
of SUVs. Bud went to the proving grounds in the desert around Phoenix and spent
a day watching the vehicle demonstrations. Bud and other dealers drove the
vehicles, and much dust resulted from their driving. A few weeks later, Bud
became ill with flu-like symptoms. He was finally diagnosed as having
coccidioidomycosis or “valley fever.” Valley fever is a disease well
known to Arizona residents, and most have had it if they have lived there over
10 years. Newcomers are particularly vulnerable to the disease because the
exposure to dust seems to build up immunity among the residents.

Bud became quite ill and brought suit against the car manufacturer that invited
him for its failure to warn him about the valley fever phenomenon before he
came out to the testing grounds. Answer the following questions, and use cases
and theories from the text to support your arguments:

Was there negligence in the failure of General Motors to warn Bud? (15 points)

Discuss all defenses General Motors may have. (15 points)

Does strict liability in torts apply to this situation? Why or why not? (10
points)TCO D: Barney and his 16-year-old son BamBam are riding
in Fred’s car. Fred had taken some prescription medication that morning that
stated on the bottle, “Warning, may cause drowsiness.” The truck in
front of them suffers a blow-out, and swerves uncontrollably. The tire remnants
fly into the road, Fred swerves and hits a car to his left. He avoids hitting
the truck with the blow-out but suffers damage to the left side of his car.
BamBam hits his head on the side of the car, getting a concussion and
permanently losing the sight in his right eye. Fred has state law required auto
insurance with the minimum policy limits.Fred’s wife, Wilma,
immediately calls Betty, BamBam’s mom, and apologizes when she finds out about
BamBam losing his eye. Wilma says to Betty, “Please don’t worry. We will
pay for anything the insurance doesn’t cover, including the loss of BamBam’s
sight and anything else he needs to recover and live a normal life.” Betty
sobs and says, “You are too good to us. We can’t accept that.” Wilma
says, “Of course you can.” Betty cries harder and says, “Thank
you so much but (unintelligible)” and hangs up.Fred and Wilma own a
house worth $450,000, a car worth $20,000, a full-size T. rex skeleton for
which a museum has offered $200,000 in the past, and some stocks and bonds
worth $700,000.A lawsuit ensues and
a judgment against Fred and for BamBam is entered for $300,000. The insurance
company paid their cap of $250,000, leaving $50,000 remaining due. Fred and
Wilma immediately pay BamBam $50,000. Further, Wilma buys a designer eye-patch
for BamBam made specifically by Calvin Klein with a picture of Fred and Wilma’s
daughter, Pebbles, on it. Wilma hugs BamBam when she brings over his new eye
patch and says, “Anything. Anything you need. We will take care of it for
you.” Fred rolls his eyes at Barney, and Barney sighs and shakes his head.
Betty and Wilma both cry at how adorable BamBam looks with his new eye patch.
Barney buys BamBam a new car, specially designed for people with one eye. Wilma
finds out and calls Betty, asking how much the car was. Betty says they are
making payments on the car of $450/month for the next 4 years. Wilma writes
Betty a check for $450, and sends her one every month for the next 8 months.Eight months after
the judgment was rendered, BamBam is discovered to have more damage to his head
than originally thought. He loses sight in his other eye and now is totally
blind. BamBam’s parents sue Fred and Wilma again for personal injury, but the
case is thrown out as the first case already decided the injury case. Fred
refuses to pay more to BamBam, and he takes the checkbook away from Wilma when
he discovers she’s been making BamBam’s car payments. The two families stop
speaking to each other. BamBam throws away his now useless eyepatch and becomes
despondent. His dreams of being a drag racer seem to be over. BamBam’s attorney
refiles the case, this time on grounds that Wilma’s statement to Betty was a
binding contract that requires that Wilma pay any remaining damages to BamBam,
for the remainder of his life.Was Wilma’s statement
a binding contract? Using the law of contracts, explain why or why not. Does
BamBam’s age have anything to do with your answer? Can Fred be bound by the
potential contract Wilma may have entered into? Use the law of agency to
explain your answer to that question. Did Wilma’s purchase of the eye-patch
give BamBam a greater leg to stand on in court? What about the car payments she
made? Explain fully your answer to these questions.TCO I. Marianne Jennings wrote an article, “Why an
International Code of Ethics would be good,” which was assigned to be read
at the beginning of the course. As you have worked throughout this session, you
should have considered this article and how it may or may not have impacted
different situations in the world economic/business/legal/political
environments. The essay you will write on the next question should show that
you have read Marianne’s article and can apply her theories and thoughts from
that article to the scenario provided. Feel free to rely on the information you
know about the situations (if real) or analogize to another one, if you wish.
Include in your answer at least two specific concepts from Marianne’s article,
and apply those concepts to your reasoning in your answer. You will be graded
on your knowledge of the article as well as the application of ethical theories
to international situations.An oil travesty has
occurred. In the Gulf Coast, British Petroleum’s deep-sea oil well has had a
major malfunction and has exploded. The explosion killed many oil workers. The
oil well began spewing oil into the Gulf, and now the entire southern portion
of the United States coastal areas has been destroyed.BP initially came out
with advertisements using the CEO of the company apologizing and promising to
make this right for the citizens of the United States. Then, the CEO was
removed by BP from working the disaster. The crisis continues. Based on the
“timing” of the crisis and resolutions that have occurred at the time
of your exam, answer the following question using the most relevant facts you
know.Using Marianne
Jenning’s article, would an international code of ethics have assisted with the
handling of this crisis? Would it have helped BP avoid this crisis? Do you see
this as an ethical issue? Support your answer with concepts from her article,
as well as other ethical reasons.TCO A. Use the fact pattern you received in the above
Marianne Jennings “International Code of Ethics” question to answer
this question. Analyze and propose a solution to the problem you received above
using the Blanchard and Peale method. Show the steps, apply the facts, and
provide a proposed solution you would suggest