LAW 531 Week 3 Assignments

$10.00

Read “The IRAC method of case study analysis.”

 

Select one legal case from a current event that has taken place within the past 2 years relevant to the following objectives:

  • 3.3: Differentiate between personal, real, and intellectual property issues.
  • 3.4: Determine appropriate methods to address potential property issues.

Discuss the selected case with your Learning Team.

 

Brief the selected case as a Learning Team.

 

Write a case brief using the IRAC method.

 

Write an explanation of no more than 750 words about how the legal concepts in the selected case can be applied within a business managerial setting.

 

Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment.

 

 

2-

For the following scenarios you should:

1) Write a paper of no more than 1500 words

2) Analyze the potential torts; and

3) Provide a recommendation on how to eliminate the issues seen for

each Defendant (the person or business, who might be sued).


Scenario 1: 
Iryna orders a meal in an Thai restaurant. After her food is served, she

takes a bite and cries out in pain. She has bitten down on a piece of

glass. Upon hearing Iryna’s cry, another waiter who is pouring wine at a

nearby table spins around and bumps into Iryna’s waiter, who is

carrying a flaming dish. The flaming dish tilts onto Iryna’s waiter, and

her apron catches fire. She rips it off and casts it aside, where it ignites

another tablecloth. People start screaming and run for the door, but

because it is a revolving door, only one or two people can leave at a

time. An old man is trampled by the crowd and is seriously injured.

Several other patrons suffer smoke inhalation and burns, but finally,

everyone is out.

When the ambulances and fire engines arrive, Iryna is among those

transported to the emergency room. Her mouth is bleeding profusely,

and she is becoming weak. The emergency room doctor tells Iryna that

immediate surgery will be necessary to stop the bleeding and save her

tooth. She is immediately prepped for surgery. While she is

unconscious, the surgeon mistakes her for another patient and

amputates her left leg.

Scenario 2: Christine is an agent for Insure, Inc., an independent

insurance agency that offers policies from several insurance

companies. With the economy in crisis, Insure, Inc. is experiencing hard

times. The boss tells the agents that if they do not start selling

insurance policies, the agency is going to shut down and everyone will

be out of a job. Christine needs this job badly, and starts calling his

customers to see if he can sell some policies. She calls John, and tells

John that if he increases his coverage at present rates, Christine will

guarantee that the premiums will never go up. He tells other customers

the same thing, and many take advantage of the offer to increase their

coverage and lock in at the present rates. The commissions start rolling

in, and the boss is pleased.

A year later, when customers get bills for policy renewals, they are irate

to see that premiums have gone up. The boss finds out for the first time

what Christine has done when she is served with a lawsuit filed by a

customer. She yells at Christine, and demands that he clear out his

desk. She has security escort Christine out of the building in front of the

other agents, who are shocked. When asked by the other agents about

what happened, the boss tells them Christine was fired for stealing.

John decides to get back at the agency, and marches up and down the

street in front of the agency with a big sign that says, “Insure, Inc.

cheats its customers!” The boss cannot let this continue, so she takes a

staple gun, goes outside, and fires it in John’s direction, hoping to scare

him away. Unfortunately, she misses and hits John in the eye, causing

permanent blindness in that eye.

Scenario 3: Adam is a sales clerk at Cheap-So Mart, a huge discount

store. He works in the hardware and gun department. One day, Louis

asks to look at a rifle. Adam unlocks the case and hands Louis the rifle

he wanted to see. Louis examines the rifle, and tells Adam he will take

the rifle and a box of bullets. Adam puts the bullets on the counter, and

turns to ring up the transaction. While Adam is not looking, Louis opens

the box, loads the rifle, aims, and shoots a lady who is walking with a

man in the next aisle. Upon seeing his wife fall, the man clutches at his

chest and has a heart attack.

Louis aims at someone else, but Adam tackles him and knocks him

down, spoiling his shot. The bullet ricochets off a metal beam and

injures a boy. Adam and Louis struggle until Adam knocks Louis

unconscious. The store security guard comes over and, in the heat of

anger, kicks the unconscious Louis in the ribs. Adam can hear Louis’s

ribs breaking. Adam and the security guard manage to lock Louis in a

storage room until the police come. For some reason, the police do not

arrive for two hours. Before they get there, Louis comes to and bangs

on the door, saying he needs medical attention. The security guard tells

Louis, “Be quiet or I will break more of your ribs.” Louis does not get

released from the closet until the police arrive to arrest him.

Description

LAW 531 Week 3 Assignments

Week Three IRAC Brief

Case:DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. v. Waxman. August 3, 2012. In the outlined case, DePuy is trying to sue one of their distributors Joint Venture for breach of a non-compete agreement. Under the non-compete covenant Joint Venture disclaim the rights to any of DePuy intangible assets, including intellectual property (IP), goodwill, and customer lists. DePuy claims that Joint Venture breached the non-compete agreement which caused a drop in sales and damaged their relationship with customers in the territories outlined within the agreement.Therefore, the legality of the contract enforced due to the breach of the non-compete agreement. According to Cheeseman 2013, “the section 2-201(1) statue of sales contracts of Uniform Commercial Code laws help prevent fraud like this case” (p. 171). To avoid this case by Depuy or any other companies’ managerial setting must specify agreements with language that is comprehensible by both parties in written valid contracts.

Issue:Was there a breach to the contract, under that non-compete covenant between DePuy and Joint Venture? What kind of defenses do companies use to mitigate risk related to personal, real, or intellectual property (IP) issues?

The main reason this case went to court is because of the breach of non-compete agreements by Joint Venture. DePuy outlined in the Amendment Agreementthat it had retained the sole right to enforce the non-compete covenants that Joint Venture had the right to enforce (Case). This means that once Joint Venture began calling accounts in their former DePuy territories they were in breach of the Amendment Agreement, which led to the drop of sales for Depuy.One form of intellectual property is trade secrets, and customer lists are considered trade secrets (Cheeseman, 2013). In this case,  the former employees should not have used previous contacts to increase sales for their new employer. They may have considered the lists to be their personal property. Those contact lists and the act of being a sales representative of [DePuy] in the Countiesare considered intangible assets of intellectual property. “Intangible assets are those that do not exist in a physical form and so cannot be touched or seen” (Intangible assets, 2013).To mitigate risk a business should use specific language to explain the non-compete clause in their contracts. It should be clear to the employee or business partner exactly what is meant and what items are included as DePuy did with Joint Ventures.

Tort Analysis

LAW 531

 

Tort Analysis

Introduction

Law of tort is disturbed with the involvement and circulation of losses. This division of law prevailing engagements for harms for damages to reserved legal rights, for example, right to property, right to personal security, right to personal reputation, etc. The word “tort” means in law, a wrong or injury which deals with conditions wherever an individual’s actions cause injury to people in broad-spectrum which has certain characteristics. Its most important characteristics are that it is redressable‎ in an action for damages at the instance of the injured person. Here the injured person can get damages from the wrong doer to the satisfaction of his injury.

Scenario 1

Iryna Claim

Iryna was served a meal with glass in it causing her severe and permanent oral injuries as well as great pain and torment. Her claims are that Thai restaurant botched to sufficiently preserve, examine, and observe the restaurant’s kitchen. If the food is packaged, it’s probable to file a products liability incident, as it was hazardous for consumption. It might also be potential to file a regular negligence claim, as a glass in the meal can only mean that something went askew.”A manufacturer’s or seller’s tort liability for any damages or injuries suffered by a buyer, user, or bystander as a result of a defective product” (Baker, Spengler& Connaughton, 2004) is known as product liability.“Products liability can be based on a theory of negligence, strict liability, or breach of warranty” (Garner, 2000, p. 982).This is case of res ipsaloquitor. Glass in her food cannot happen without some type of negligence of the company.

Iryna vs. Doctor:

Iryna was transported to the emergency room for medical attention to stop the bleeding and to save her tooth. Upon her arrival she was informed that she need surgery immediately. She was unconscious and the surgeon mistakes her for another patient and amputates her left leg. She sues the surgeon for professional malpractice and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

“To prevail in a tort lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, that the defendant breached this duty by failing to adhere to the standard of care expected, and that this breach of duty caused an injury to the plaintiff”(Studdert, Mello, & Brennan. 2004).

Courts have long ruled that medical malpractice is a foreseeable possibility when injury patients are treated for injuries suffered as a result of the negligence of a third party and because such malpractice is foreseeable, the third party is liable for those injury damages as well.

Patrons Claims

The patrons at the restaurant can sue the restaurant for negligence. The waiters had a duty to be careful and not bump into people or other objects. The rest of the staff had a duty to manage the commotion that ensued as everyone fled the premises. If the patronsdo not have any injures they have no case. The restaurant could also argue contributory or comparative negligence on the part of the people because they failed to exit the restaurant in the manner reasonable people would exit. The old man that was trampled by the crowd can sue the restaurant for negligence as well. He was injured because there were not enough exits for everyone to get out of and he was trying to exit like everyone else. It is the restaurant duty and responsible to provide routes and keep people calm during an incident of this nature that took place in their establishment. They had no plans for exiting if the building was on fire and that why the events

 

Reviews

There are no reviews yet.

Be the first to review “LAW 531 Week 3 Assignments”

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *