Gm520 midterm exam (1)

1. CLICK HERE TO
DOWNLOAD
GM520 Midterm Exam (1)
1. TCO B. Infuriated when Harry Reid is re-elected during the 2010 fall
election, the Republican National Committee decides to take matters
into its 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. (Points : 15)
2. TCO F. In Midler v. Ford Motor Co., Bette Midler sued Ford for
unauthorized appropriation. Explain what appropriation is. Tell me what
type of civil claim appropriation is and what a person has to prove to
win damages for it. (short answer only) (Points : 15)
3. (TCO C) One summer, David Baxter and his wife, Melissa, were on
their new boat with another couple, tubing on the Mississippi river.
David and the other couple had been drinking all day, "about seven
or eight beers each and some Crown Royal," although Melissa wasn't
drinking due to being pregnant. As he prepared to jump into the water to
tube, David's feet slipped out from under him, and he fell into the water,
hitting the back of his head and neck on the ladder, knocking him out
cold. He slipped under the water and drowned. The other members of
the party didn't notice his absence until a passing barge pilot got their

2. attention. He had seen the entire thing through his binoculars; he had
been watching Melissa and her friend Angela (who were in bathing
suits). Despite an immediate search and rescue attempt by the coast
guard, David was not saved. Melissa alleged that the surface of the boat
floor where David was standing and preparing to jump into the water
was unreasonably slippery. In fact, at issue in the case was the
manufacturing process used in coating the flooring. Melissa (and her
attorney) felt that a nonslip surface should have been placed on the floor
of the boat. The safety manual that came with the boat included these
clauses: "CAUTION: Wet surfaces can be slippery. Passengers
should wear adequate deck shoes while boarding and underway to avoid
accidental slipping and injury." "CAUTION: Deck areas and swim
platform are slippery when wet. Passengers must be careful when
passing through companionway to prevent accidental slipping or
tripping. Passengers should wear adequate deck shoes at all times to
prevent accidental slipping. Passengers must stay off swim platform
while underway to prevent falling overboard." No warnings existed,
however, in view of the passengers on the boat. (25 points) What
potential legal theories of recovery can and should Melissa allege
against the following parties (provide support for your
answer)? I. The boat manufacturer II. The boat seller III. The
coast guard (15 points) What legal theories of defense can and should
each of the above three parties use? Provide support for your answer.
(Points : 40)
4. TCO D: (This is a fictional scenario.) Billy Joel decided he wanted to
learn to play the violin for his next set of concerts. He called a violin
salesman in New York and asked if he had any for sale. The salesman
stated he had a Stradivarius and a Guarnerius (two famous brands of
violins) and offered to sell them to Billy for $80,000 and $24,000,
respectively. Billy agreed, over the phone, to purchase the violins from
the salesman and told him he would be in town the next week to pick
them up.
Billy didn't show up for two months, and when he entered the store, the
salesman wasn't there. His wife, Margaret, was there in the
store, however, and she had full knowledge of the deal cut between her
husband and Billy. (She'd heard her husband whining, complaining, and
wailing about Billy not showing up for the last 2 months – and she was

3. really sick of hearing about it.)
Billy asked to see the violins, and Margaret showed him both of them.
Billy stated he would agree to pay $65,000 for both of them, and
Margaret, knowing that they were counterfeits and only worth $2,000
AND realizing that their house was about to go into foreclosure, agreed
to the reduction in price and sold Billy the two violins for $65,000. She
gave him a bill of sale that she wrote out on a note pad on the counter,
which said, "Paid in full. Strativarus and Granruius violans. $65,000.
Chk # 4301 Billy Joel. Salesperson: Margaret Madoff." The notepad was
one she had brought home from their last vacation to Las Vegas and was
from The Flamingo hotel there. Billy took home the violins and
proceeded to learn to play, albeit very poorly.
Meanwhile, the salesman discovers that Margaret sold the violins for
less than he had bargained for. He sues Billy Joel for the $39,000
difference, stating that Margaret was not an employee of the store and
had no authority to change the deal he and Billy had made.
During the pendency of the suit, and after his next concert, the
newspapers stated, "Billy Joel should give up playing the violin! He
stinks!" Billy takes his violins to a music store to sell them and discovers
they are only worth $2,000 and that they are not Stradivarius and
Guarnerius violins but are instead counterfeits.
He wants to countersue the salesman and asks you on what basis can he
do so. Using contract, agency, and any other legal concepts you have
learned this session, on what bases can Billy sue the salesman and his
wife? What defenses will they have? Do you think Billy can recover?
Further, will Margaret's husband (his name is Bernard) be able to collect
against Billy for the difference in price from the original deal? Explain
your answer fully as to the why's, wherefore's, and why not's for both
parties. Use bullet points and "issue spotting" to assist you in your
answer.
(Points : 40)
5. 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,

4. 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.
In 2009–10, Toyota experienced a troubling "gas pedal" sticking issue,
which impacted its global reputation and income and caused it to stagger
in its, until then, position as one of the top, world-wide, respected, and
best-selling car companies on the globe. Over the first few months of the
crisis, Toyota waffled on its message to its customers, both denying and
then accepting responsibility for the issue. Research into the situation
shows that the problem had been brought to its attention for a long time
and either ignored, disbelieved, or grudgingly accepted, depending on
the time and place of the issue.
For this question, think about the facts of the Toyota recall and its
impact on Toyota car owners worldwide, including the value (or loss
thereof) of customer's trade-ins, car dealer's business valuation losses,
loss in used car sales to used car dealers and owners, and also the loss of
lives and injuries to those who were grossly impacted by the gas pedal
issue. Also, think about the cost to stockholders and the other
stakeholders involved. Now think about Marianne Jenning's
international code of ethics article. Would an international code of ethics
have impacted how this entire Toyota travesty played out in the real
world? What if the "world of business" had agreed to one? Would
Toyota have been somehow required to behave differently, which would
have protected so many stakeholders from losses and people from
injury? Or, would nothing really have changed? Feel free to argue both
sides of this, and include in your answer, please, at least two or three
things you would have included (or Marianne Jennings recommended to
include) in an international code of ethics and how that would (or
wouldn't) really have impacted the Toyota crisis. Evaluate, analyze, and

5. synthesize your answer using everything you have learned this session
about ethics, law, politics, and business.
(Points : 40)
6. 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 Laura Nash method. Show the steps, apply the facts, and
provide a proposed solution you would suggest. (Points : 40)