The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases
9th Edition
ISBN: 9781305764460
Author: Frank B Cross/ Roger LeRoy Miller
Publisher: CENGAGE C
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
thumb_up100%
Chapter 1, Problem 5BCP
Summary Introduction
Case summary:
The manger of Incorporation A was transferred between multiple stores of city C. He did not suffer any kind of loss in his payments or responsibilities due to the frequent transfers. However, an EEOC complaint was filed by him against the incorporation claiming that it intended to make the store ‘predominantly Hispanic’.
To find: The primary sources of the court’s decision in the provided case.
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Students have asked these similar questions
On July 6, 2015, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declined to extend a controversial appellate ruling from the Second Circuit that raised the bar for prosecutors to secure insider trading convictions where inside information is passed among family members. The twist? The Ninth Circuit's opinion is written by Southern District of New York Judge Jed Rakoff, sitting in the Ninth Circuit by designation. (United States v. Salman, No. 14-10204, (9th Cir. July 6, 2015).)
Maher Kara (Maher) began working for Citigroup's healthcare investment banking group in 2002. Maher regularly disclosed information about upcoming Citigroup client mergers and acquisitions to his older brother, Mounir "Michael" Kara (Michael), who traded on that information. Over time, Michael shared the inside information with Appellant Bassam Yacoub Salman (Salman), who was Maher's brother-in-law and close friends with Michael. Michael also encouraged Salman to replicate his trading activity.
Michael and Salman…
What is the Parol Evidence Rule? Please describe one circumstance in which you believe the rule should be followed and why? Please describe a circumstance in which you believe the rule should not be followed and why?
Please not, this is business law question. Thank you.
Need a long and detailed self-explanatory analysis of the following case after hearing the oral argument of the case in Oyez
Bank of America Corp. v. City of Miami
Chapter 1 Solutions
The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- please choose the most correct anwser.arrow_forwarda. Provide some analysis of "frustration in law" to demonstrate understanding of the concept; with the use of examples. b. Use the three case laws below to substantiate your position on frustration in law based on the facts and outcome of their case. BP Exploration Co. (Libya) Ltd. v. Hunt (No. 2) (1979) National Carriers Ltd. v. Panalpina (Northern) Ltd. (1981) Taylor v. Caldwell (1863)arrow_forwardComp 1. is a law developed by judges, courts, and similar tribunals. Over time, the decisions in individual cases establish precedents for future cases: A. Common Law B. Tort Law C. State Law D. Federal Law E. Local Law iş the area of tort law in which product manufacturers 2.arrow_forward
- 1) A black firefighter alleges that each time he is transferred from one fire station to another, he must take his bed with him, on orders of the fire chief. The fire chief defends on the basis that it is a legitimate decision because white firefighters would not want to sleep in the same bed in which a black firefighter slept. Is this illegal under Title VII? Explain 2) A white college receptionist is fired when it is found that she told a black college applicant that the applications for admissions are distinguished by race by the notation of a small Rh in the corner of black applicants’ applications.”Rh,”she says, is her supervisor’s term for “raisin heads, “which he calls African-Americans. Is this employee entitled to reinstatement? 3) jose and Cesar, both Hispanic, are carpenters employed by a contractor to help build an office building in Maryland. While working, Jose and Cesar discover that they are being paid less than non-Hispanic employees. In addition, they allege a hostile…arrow_forwardFind a case with the following citation: 792 F.3d 1146. Assume your client lives in Maine that this case is relevant to your clients issue. Is this case authoritative for your client?a. Yes, as long as the facts of the case are identical to the facts of your clients case. b. Yes, as long as the facts of the case are similar to the facts of your clients case.c. No.d. No, but only because the case is over five years old, and therefore no longer good law.e. Unable to tell from the fact given in this question.arrow_forwardWhich of the following would NOT be an appropriate scenario in which to overcome stare decisis? O Telemarketing laws in the past allowed marketers to contact consumers without approval. Recent legislative efforts have changed these statutes and any court hearing a case in this area does not have to follow these outdated statutes. O Justice Fitzgerald disagreed with the lower court's decision on healthcare initiatives, even though the lower court's decision followed Medicare law. Justice Fitzgerald wishes to not follow precedents due to his own personal beliefs. Q The trial court ruled incorrectly in a consumer fraud case. Explicitly refuting the trial court's reasoning, an appeals court - which was hearing the appeal from that trial court decision overturned the trial court. The appeals court did sod on the grounds that trial court decision was based on an erroneous reading of the laws. O The Fourth Circuit has consistently held that all businesses must register with the state to…arrow_forward
- 1-1 Binding versus Persuasive Authority. A county court in Illinois is deciding a case inovlving an issue that has never been addressed before in that state's court. The Iowa Supreme Court, however, recently decided a case involving a very similar fact pattern. Is the Illinois court obligated to follow the Iowa Supreme Court decision on the issue? If the United States Supreme Court had decided a similar case, would that decision be binding on the Illinois court? Explain ( See The Common Law Tradition.)arrow_forwardAccording to the case FTC v Standard Education, Question 11 options: The Court advocated a change of standard from the ignorant-consumer standard to the reasonable-person standard The Court set a precedent that unless an advertisement makes a obviously false claim, an advertisement is not deceptive The Court advocated a change of standard from the reasonable-person standard to the gullible-consumer standard The rule of caveat emptor should be the guiding principle in deciding consumer fraud casesarrow_forwardA few days before the end of the term of a two-year NDA (nondisclosure agreement) he signed witha startup company related to a possible patent, Frank interviewed with another startup and divulgedinformation covered by the agreement. The interview had been scheduled for a week later, in whichcase it wouldn’t have been an issue, but had been moved up when another job applicant dropped outand the company had an opening for an earlier interview. Frank reasoned that he had met the spiritof the NDA, and a few days early wouldn’t really matter. Besides, as it turned out, the company heinterviewed with wasn’t interested in that information, although they did hire him. What would youhave done if you were Frank?arrow_forward
- please choose the most correct anwser.arrow_forwardWhat is the significance of the 2010 Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission? a. It ruled that politicians must cap the donations they receive from companies. b. It ruled that the government has the authority to place limits on corporate spending in candidate elections. c. It ruled that the government is not authorized to ban corporate spending in candidate elections. d. It ruled that individuals are authorized to donate as much money as they like to candidate elections. e. It ruled that citizens have the right to sue firms for donating large sums to candidates.arrow_forward29. The owner of a beachfront property is tired of all the trash left on the beach by the general public. He put up a "Keep Out" sign on the high tide mark, but his attorney told him that was not a sensible move. What was the lawyer's main concern? ○ The lawyer was concerned about the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation. ○ The lawver was concerned about littoral rights. The lawyer had been contacted by the local homeowners' association declaring the sign was unsightly. The lawyer was concerned about the safety of the homeowner.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student EditionBusinessISBN:9781337407137Author:KellyPublisher:Cengage Learning
Essentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...BusinessISBN:9781337386494Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana LoewyPublisher:Cengage Learning
Accounting Information Systems (14th Edition)BusinessISBN:9780134474021Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. SteinbartPublisher:PEARSON
International Business: Competing in the Global M...BusinessISBN:9781259929441Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. HultPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student Edition
Business
ISBN:9781337407137
Author:Kelly
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Essentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...
Business
ISBN:9781337386494
Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana Loewy
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Accounting Information Systems (14th Edition)
Business
ISBN:9780134474021
Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. Steinbart
Publisher:PEARSON
International Business: Competing in the Global M...
Business
ISBN:9781259929441
Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. Hult
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education