Instructor’s Solution Manual: Law for Business (15th Edition) – Barnes (Chapters 1–47 Complete Answers)

INSTUCTORVMANUALVFOR
LawVforVBusinessV15eVBarnes
ChapterV1-47

CHAPTERV1:VLAWVANDVLEGALVREASONING

LECTUREVOUTLINE

1. DiscussVtheVTwisdaleVcaseVthatVopensVthisVchapter.VItVprovidesVanVinterestingVveh
icleVforVdiscussingVtheVfunctionsVofVlawVandVlegalVinterpretation.

a. HaveVyourVstudentsVidentifyVtheVvariousVfunctionsVofVtheVlawVandVthenVdiscussVw
hichVspecificVfunctionsVareVfurtheredVbyVthisVantiretaliationVaspectsVofVtheVCivilVRi
ghtsVstatute.

b. InVtheVcontextVofVlegalVinterpretation,VtheVcourtVfoundVthatVTwisdaleVdidVseemVtoV
beVprotectedVbasedVonVtheVliteralVlanguageVofVtheVstatute.VHowever,VitVlookedVbeyo
ndVtheVplainVmeaningVtoVrejectVhisVclaim.VSpecifically,VtheVcourtVbelievedVthatVinte
rpretingVtheVlawVinVaVmannerVthatVwouldVprotectVhimVfromVretaliationVwouldVunder
mineVtheVpurposeVofVtheVstatute.VItVisVconceivableVthatVtheVcourtVisVmotivatedVbyVp
ublicVpolicyVconcernsVasV well.

c. WhatVdoVyourVstudentsVthinkVofVcourtsVwhoVdoVlookVatVintentVandVpublicVpolicy?
VUseVthisVasVaVlead-inVforVaVdiscussionVofVlegalVjurisprudence.


2. QuestionVstudentsVaboutVtheirVdefinitionsVofV―law.‖VMakeVcertainVtheyVundersta
ndVtheVimportanceVofVlawVinVallVaspectsVofVourVlives.

3. DiscussVtheVvariousVfunctionsVthatVlawVservesVinVsociety.VYouVmightVdoVthisVbyVha
vingVtheVstudentsVidentifyVsomeVofVthem.

a. DiscussVtheVconflictsVthatVariseVbetweenVandVamongVtheVvariousVfunctionsVofVlaw.V
ForVexample,VthereVoftenVareVconflictsVbetweenVtheVgoalsVofVindividualVfreedomVan
dVachievingVsocialVjustice.VNoteVtheVproblemsVthatVariseVwhenVthereVisVnoVclearVco
nsensusVonVwhatVisVjust.

b. AskVtheVstudentsVifVtheyVthinkVthatVlawVeverVisV―overused.‖VTheyVareVlikelyVtoVc
iteVnumerousVexamples.VForVinstance,VthisVmightVbeVaVtimeVtoVtalkVaboutVtheVprod
uctVliabilityVcasesVthatVareVregularlyVinVtheVheadlines.VPerhapsVtheVcaseVinvolvingV
theVwomanVwhoVburnedVherselfVwithVcoffeeVfromVMcDonald’sVwouldVbeVappropria
teVhere.


1-1

©VMcGrawVHillVLLC.VAllVrightsVreserved.VNoVreproductionVorVdistributionVwithoutVtheVpriorVwritte
nVconsentVofVMcGrawVHillVLLC.

, c. HaveVtheVstudentsVdiscussVwhatVitVmeansVtoVhaveVtheVlawVmaintainVorder.VYouVm
ightVaskVstudentsVifVmaintainingVorderVmeansVmaintainingVtheVstatusVquo.VThisVca
nVleadVtoVaVdiscussionVofVlegalVrealismVandVviewsVthatVlawVisVusedVbyVthoseVinV
powerVtoVretainVtheirVpower.

4. ThereVisVaVtendencyVforVpeopleVtoVthinkVofVlawVasVimposingVdutiesVwithoutVconsiderin
gVhowVitVestablishesVandVpreservesVrights.VTalkVaboutVhowVourVsystemVtriesVtoVmatchV
rightsVwithVcorrespondingVduties.

a. ExplainVhowVduties,Vrights,VandVprivilegesVmakeVupVsubstantiveVlaw.

b. ExplainVthatVproceduralVlawVprovidesVtheVframeworkVwithinVwhichVsubstantiveVlaw
sVareVcreatedVandVenforced.VPointVoutVthatVChaptersV2VandV4VofferVaVmoreVdetailed
VdiscussionVofVproceduralVlaw.


5. AskVtheVstudentsVtoVthinkVofVanVexampleVofVaVdutyVimposedVbyVsubstantiveVlawVthatV
mightVviolateVsomeVmoralVorVethicalVbelief.VThisVmightVbeVaVgoodVtimeVtoVtalkVabout
VtheVvariousVschoolsVofVlegalVjurisprudence.VHaveVthemVspeculateVhowVaVlegalVpositivi
stVwouldVdifferVfromVaVlegalVsociologistVorVnaturalVlawVtheoristVinVhandlingVsuchVsitua
tions.

6. ContrastVcriminalVlawVwithVcivilVlaw.

a. PointVoutVthatVsocietyVconsidersVitVmuchVworseVtoVbeVconvictedVofVaVcrimeVthanVt
oVbeVheldVcivillyVliable.VExplainVhow,VasVaVresult,VthereVareVmoreVexactingVproced
uralVsafeguardsVtoVprotectVaVdefendantVinVaVcriminalVtrialVthanVinVaVcivilVtrial.

b. NoteVtheVdifferenceVbetweenVcompensatoryVdamagesVandVpunitiveVdamages.VDiscu
ssVtheVcurrentVuproarVoverVpunitiveVdamagesVandVtheVSupremeVCourt’sVattemptVto
VreinVthemVin.VSeeVStateVFarmVMutualVAutomobileVInsuranceVv.VCampbell,V123VS.
Ct.V1513V(U.S.VSup.VCt.V2003)V(establishingVguidepostsVforVcalculatingVpunitiveVd
amages).VPunitiveVdamagesVareVdiscussedVfurtherVinVChapterV6.

c. PointVoutVthatVoftenVoneVcanVbeVsubjectVtoVsanctionsVunderVbothVcriminalVandVci
vilVlawsVwithoutVviolatingVtheVproscriptionVagainstV―doubleVjeopardy.‖VFindVout
VifVtheVstudentsVthinkVthatVpunitiveVdamagesVinVaVcivilVtrial,VcoupledVwithVfines
VinVaVcriminalVtrial,VconstituteVaVtypeVofVdoubleVjeopardy.


MarinelloVv.VUnitedVStates

MarinelloVwasVchargedVwithVtheVcrimeVofVcorruptlyVimpedingVtheVdueVadministrationVofVthe
VTaxVCodeVafterVheVengagedVinVseveralVactivitiesVthatVunderreportedVhisVtaxableVincome.VH
owever,Vthe
U.S.VSupremeVCourtVoverturnedVhisVcriminalVconvictionVbecauseVMarinelloVwasVunawareVth

1-2

©VMcGrawVHillVLLC.VAllVrightsVreserved.VNoVreproductionVorVdistributionVwithoutVtheVpriorVwritte
nVconsentVofVMcGrawVHillVLLC.

,atVheVwasVunderVIRSVinvestigationVatVtheVtimeVofVhisVactivities.VCitingVtheVneedVtoVconstru
eVcriminal




1-3

©VMcGrawVHillVLLC.VAllVrightsVreserved.VNoVreproductionVorVdistributionVwithoutVtheVpriorVwritte
nVconsentVofVMcGrawVHillVLLC.

, statutesVnarrowly,VtheVCourtVruledVthatVtheVparticularVstatute—theVOmnibusVClause—
didVnotVcoverVallVactivitiesVthatVunderreportedVincome.VTheVCourtVbelievedVthatVtheVstatuteV
coveredVaVnarrowerVrangeVofVactivitiesVaimedVdirectlyVatVthwartingVtheVactivitiesVofVinvesti
gationsVwhenVtheVtaxpayerVknewVorVshouldVhaveVknownVanVinvestigationVwasVunderway.

PointsVforVDiscussion:VThisVcaseVisVplacedVinVtheVtextVasVanVexampleVofVtheVgeneralVrules
VunderlyingVcriminalVlaw.VSpecifically,VaVpersonVgenerallyVcannotVbeVconvictedVofVaVcrime
VunlessVheVorVsheVviolatesVaVstatute.VHowever,VsuchVstatutesVmustVbeVobjectivelyVclearVtoV
aVreasonableVperson.VThisVGovernment’sVinterpretationVofVthisVstatuteVwasVbelievedVtoVgra
ntVtheVGovernmentVtooVmuchVdiscretionVinVdeterminingVwhatVconstitutedVaVcrime.

7. TheVbriefVintroductionVtoVourVlegalVsystemVshouldVbeVaVreviewVforVmostVstudents.

a. TheVconstitutionalVlawVmaterialVisVmoreVheavilyVdiscussedVinVChapterV4.VAnVargum
entVcanVbeVmadeVforVitVtoVbeVpresentedVimmediatelyVfollowingVthisVchapter.VHowe
ver,VweVbelieveVstudentsVshouldVfirstVreviewVChapterV2’sVdiscussionVofVtheVdispute
VresolutionVsystem.


b. TalkVaboutVtheVroleVofVtheVcourtsVinVdeterminingVtheVconstitutionalityVofVlegislati
on.VDoVtheyVbelieveVthisVgivesVtheVcourtsVtooVmuchVpower?

c. ExplainVtheVrelationshipVbetweenVstateVlawsVandVfederalVlaws.VMakeVcertainVtheVstu
dentsVunderstandVthatVstateVlawsVmayVnotVviolateVtheVfederalVconstitutionVandVmust
VbeVconsistentVwithVfederalVstatutes.


HenryVScheinVv.VArcherV&VWhiteVSales

TheVFederalVArbitrationVActVprovidesVthatVpartiesVmay,VthroughVtheirVpowerVtoVcontract,Vag
reeVthatVtheirVdisputesVwillVbeVarbitrated.VInVaddition,VtheVActVallowsVthoseVsameVpartiesVto
VagreeVthatVanVarbitrator,VratherVthanVaVcourt,VwillVdetermineVwhetherVthatVarbitrationVclaus
eVappliesVtoVanyVparticularVdisputeVtheyVmayVhave.VHowever,VseveralVfederalVappellateVcourt
sVcarvedVoutVaV―whollyVgroundless‖VexceptionVtoVtheVlatterVruleVbyVwhichVtheyVallowedVc
ourtsVtoVconcludeVthatVarbitrationVwasVnotVappropriateVwhenVtheVcourtVbelievedVtheVclaimVo
fVarbitrabilityVwasVgroundless.VInVthisVcase,VtheVU.S.VSupremeVCourt,VcitingVbothVtheVstatut
eVandVSupremeVCourtVprecedent,VruledVthatVthe
―whollyVgroundless‖VexceptionVwasVimpermissibleVbecauseVitVcontradictedVtheVstatute.

PointsVforVDiscussion:VThisVcaseVisVanVexampleVofVtheVlimitsVonVtheVjudiciary’sVdiscretio
nVunderVtheVcommonVlaw.VItVillustratesVthatVinVtheVhierarchyVofVlaws,VlegislativeVlawVisV
superiorVtoVjudge-
VmadeVlaw.VItValsoVillustratesVtheVroleVofVprecedentVinVinterpretingVstatutes.


8. TheVmaterialVonVstatutoryVinterpretationVcanVbeVextremelyVimportantVinVlayingVtheVfou
ndationVforVhowVlawyersVthink.VMoreVimportantly,VitVteachesVstudentsVvaluableVcriticalV
1-4

©VMcGrawVHillVLLC.VAllVrightsVreserved.VNoVreproductionVorVdistributionVwithoutVtheVpriorVwritte
nVconsentVofVMcGrawVHillVLLC.