=
SOLUTION MANUAL
LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF
BUSINESS
, =
Table Of Contents
➢ Chapter 1. Today’s Business Environment: Law And Ethics
➢ Chapter 2. The Court Systems
➢ Chapter 3. Trials And Resolving Disputes
➢ Chapter 4. The Constitution: Focus On Application To Business
➢ Chapter 5. Criminal Law And Business
➢ Chapter 6. Elements Of Torts
➢ Chapter 7. Business Torts And Product Liability
➢ Chapter 8. Real And Personal Property
➢ Chapter 9. Intellectual Property
➢ Chapter 10. Contracts
➢ Chapter 11. Domestic And International Sales
➢ Chapter 12. Business Organizations
➢ Chapter 13. Negotiable Instruments, Credit, And Bankruptcy
➢ Chapter 14. Agency And The Employment Relationship
➢ Chapter 15. Employment And Labor Regulations
➢ Chapter 16. Employment Discrimination
➢ Chapter 17. The Regulatory Process
➢ Chapter 18. Securities Regulation
➢ Chapter 19. Consumer Protection
➢ Chapter 20. Antitrust Law
➢ Chapter 21. Environmental Law
➢ Chapter 22. The International Legal Environment Of Business
, =
Chapter 1
Table Of Contents
Answer To Discussion Question ........................................................................................................ 1
Answers To Case Questions ................................................................................................................ 1
Answers To Ethics And Social Questions........................................................................................ 3
Answer To Discussion Question
Should The Common Law Maxim “Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse” Apply To An
Immigrant Who Speaks Little English And Was Not Educated In The United States? How
About For A Tourist Who Does Not Speak English? Everyone Knows Criminal Acts Are
Prohibited, But What About Subtler Rules That Differ Across Countries And So May Be
Misunderstood By Foreigners?
Answer: It Is Generally True That Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse. Citizens Are Deemed
To Have Constructive Knowledge Of The Law. Yet, As Well Known As This Rule Is, It Is
Surprising How Often It Is Proffered As An Excuse. (A Westlaw Search Cases Finds
Hundreds Of Examples). Examples Include: Deluco V. Dezi (Conn. Super) (Lack Of
Knowledge Regarding The State‘S Usury Laws Is No Excuse For The Inclusion Of An Illegal
Interest Rate In A Sales Contract); And Plumlee V. Paddock (Ignorance Of The Fact That
The Subject Matter Of The Contract Was Illegal Was Not Excuse). The Courts Have
Provided A Small Exception To The Rule When It Comes To People In Lack Of English
Language Skills.
Consider Flanery V. Kuska, (Defendant Did Not Speak English Was Advised By A Friend
That An Answer To A Complaint Was Not Required); Ramon V. Dept. Of Transportation,
(No English And An Inability To Understand The Law Required For An Excuse); Yurechko
V.
County Of Allegheny, (Ignorance And With The Fact That The Municipality Suffered No
Hardship In Late Lawsuit Filing Was An Excuse).
Answers To Case Questions
1. Facts From An English Judge’s Decision In 1884: “The Crew Of An English Yacht Were
Cast Away In
A Storm On The High Seas . . . And Were Compelled To Put Into An Open Boat. They Had
No Supply
Of Water And No Supply Of Food. . . . That On The Eighteenth Day . . . They Suggested
That One
Should Be Sacrificed To Save The Rest. . . . That Next Day . . . They ..... Went To The Boy
. ....................................................................................................................................................... Put A Knife
Into His Throat And Killed Him . . . The Three Men Fed Upon The Body Of The Boy
For Four Days; [Then]
The Boat Was Picked Up By A Passing Vessel, And [They] Were Rescued ......And Committed
For Trial. . . .
If The Men Had Not Fed Upon The Body Of The Boy They Would Probably Not Have
, =
Survived To Be So Picked Up And Rescued, But Wouldhave Died Of Famine. The Boy,
Being In A Much Weaker
Condition, Was Likely To Have Died Before Them The Real Question In This Case [Is]
Whether Killing
Under The Conditions Set Forth Be Or Be Not Murder.” Do You Consider The Acts To Be
Immoral?
[Regina V. Dudley And Stephens, 14 Queens Bench Division 273 (1884)]
Answer: This Points Out That The Legal System Has Limits. Its Acceptability Is Dictated By
Legal Culture--Which Determines Whether Law Will Be Enforced, Obeyed, Avoided, Or
Abused. It Is Limited By The Informal Rules Of The Society--Its Customs And Values. One
Limit Is The Extent To Which Society Will Allow The Formal Rules To Be Imposed When A
Crime Is Committed In Odd Circumstances. Here There Was An Intentional Murder. Does
The Motive For The Murder, The Effort To Save Several Lives By Sacrificing One
Life, Make It A Crime That Should Be Punished? Not All Crimes Are Treated The Same. It Also
Raises Questions About The Desirability Of Not Giving Judges Flexibility In Sentencing.
There Was A Precedent For A Light Sentence In This Case In U.S. Law: U.S. V. Holmes, 20
F. Cas. 360 (No. 15383) (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1842). The Case Involved A Sinking Ocean Liner.
Several Passengers Made It To The Only Lifeboat, Which Was Far Too Overcrowded. The
Captain Decided To Save The Women And Children And Threw Several Men Overboard. The
Lifeboat Was Rescued. The Grand Jury Refused To Indict The Captain From Murder, Only
For Manslaughter. He Got A Six Month Sentence.
The British Judge In The Case Here Imposed The Death Penalty Upon The Person Who
Survived. The Judge Found It Difficult To Rule That Every Man On Board Had The Right
To Make Law By His Own Hand. The Crown Reduced The Sentence To Six Months.
2. Smoking Is A Serious Health Hazard. Cigarettes Are Legal. Should Cigarette
Manufacturers Be Liable For The Serious Illnesses And Untimely Deaths Caused By Their
Unavoidably Dangerous Products, Even Though They Post A Warning On T he Package And
Consumers Voluntarily Assume The Health Risks By Smoking? [Cipollone V. Liggett
Group, Inc., 505 U.S. 504 (1992)]
Answer: The General Rule That Exists Now Is That Since The Government Has Ordered The
Posting Of Warning Labels On Cigarettes, And Since The Dangers Of Smoking Are Well
Known, Consumers Have Been Warned And Are Not Due Compensation If They Kill
Themselves By Smoking. The Cippoline Case, Since Reviewed By The Supreme Court,
Appears To Be Of Limited Impact Since The Victim Was Adjudged To Have Become
Addicted To Cigarettes Before The Warning Label Was Ordered In 1964. If Cigarette
Makers Were Held Responsible For All Health Problems Associated With Cigarettes,
Then, Like Alcohol And Other Dangerous Products, The Damages Would Likely B e So
High It Would Effectively Ban The Products. Presumably, In A Free Society If Adults Are
Clearly Informed Of The Risks Of Products That Cannot Be Made Safe, They Accept The
Risk.
Tobacco And Alcohol Producers Cannot Take The Dangers Out Of The Products Except
At The Margin By Encouraging Responsible Drinking And The Like. Are Drugs Like
Cocaine Different?
3. Two Eight-Year-Old Boys Were Seriously Injured When Riding Honda Mini-Trail Bikes.
The Boys Were Riding On Public Streets, Ran A Stop Sign, And Were Hit By A Truck. The
Bikes Had Clear Warning Labels On The Front Stating They Were Only For Off-Road Use.
The Manual Stated The Bikes Were Not To Be Used On Public Streets. The Parents Sued
Honda. The Supreme Court Of Washington Said One Basic Issue Existed: “Is A
Manufacturer Liable When Children Are Injured While Riding One Of Its Mini-Trail Bikes
On A Public Road In Violation Of Manufacturer And Parental Warnings?” Is It Unethical To
, =
Make Products Like Mini-Trail Bikes Children Will Use When We Know Accidents Like This
Will Happen? [Baughn
V. Honda Motor Co., 727 P.2d 655 Sup. Ct, Wash., (1986)]
Answer: The Court Found No Liability For The Manufacturers. There Was No Defect; The
Product Was Safe For Intended Use. Safety Instructions Were Clear; The Parents Let
The Boys Ride The Bikes. Anything Can Be Dangerous--Baseballs Are Dangerous When
They Hit The Head, Swings Are Dangerous When Kids Jump Out Of Them; There Is
Only So Much That Can Be Done To Make The Government The ―National Nanny‖ As
The Washington Post Once Said About Excessive Consumer Protection. Parents Must
Accept A High Degree Of Responsible For Their Own Children.
4. Johnson Controls Adopted A “Fetal Protection Policy” That Women Of Childbearing Age
Could Not Work In The Battery-Making Division Of The Company. Exposure To Lead In
The Battery Operation Could Cause Harm To Unborn Babies. The Company Was
Concerned About Possible Legal Liability For Injury Suffered By Babies Of Mothers Who
Had Worked In The Battery Division. The Supreme Court Held The Company Policy Was
Illegal. It Was An
, =
“Excuse For Denying Women Equal Employment Opportunities.” Is The Court Forcing
The Company To Be Unethical By Allowing Pregnant Women Who Ignore The Warnings
To Expose Their Babies To The Lead? [United Auto Workers V. Johnson Controls, 499
U.S.
187 (1991)]
Answer: The Court Held It A Form Of Sex Discrimination To Prevent Women Of Child-Bearing
Age From Holding The More Dangerous Jobs. The Company Argued That It Did This To
Protect Itself From Possible Liability In Case Of Damage To Babies And That The
Decision Was Ethical. The Replacements For These Workers Were Often Men Or More
Senior Women, Who Tended To Be Higher Income Workers, So This
, =
Was Not A Current Cost-Saving Move. Note That A 2002 Ruling Related To The Ada
Significantly Restricted This Earlier Case.
5. Mcgrory Worked For Applied Signal Technology In A Supervisory Position. He Was
Accused Of Violating The Company’s Policies On Sexual Harassment. An Internal
Investigation Determined He Did Not Violate The Policy But That He Was Evasive And
Violated The Company’s Personal Ethics Code. He Was Fired And Sued For Wrongful
Termination, Contending That If He Did Not Violate Sexual Harassment Rules He
Should Not Have Been Subject To Termination. Do Standards Of Law And Ethics Need
To Be The Same For An Employer? [Mcgrory V. Applied Signal Technology, 152
Cal.Rptr.3d 154 (2013)]
Answer: The Appeals Court Affirmed That The Employer Had The Right To Terminate The
Employee For Failure To Be Fully Cooperative In The Investigation Of The Complaint Of
Sexual Harassment That Had Been Filed Against Him. While He Was Not Found To Have
Violated The Harassment Policy, He Was Evasive And Uncooperative, Which Violated The
Company‘S Code Of Ethics, Which Was A Justification For Termination.
6. Baker Works As A Document Clerk For The Minnesota Supreme Court. After She Had
Worked There For 13 Years The Minnesota Judicial Branch Adopted A Policy
Concerning Proper Internet Use And Stated That Employees Must Adhere To The
Highest Ethical Standards When Using The Internet. Eleven Years Later, She Was
Fired For Excessive Surfing On The Internet During Working Hours. She Contended
She Did Not Know About The Policy. Is That An Adequate Defense For Her? [Baker V.
Minnesota Supreme Court, 2016 Wl 102513 (2016)]
Answer: The Minnesota High Court Held That Baker‘S Termination Was Proper. She Violated
Standards Expected Of Employees. She Had Been Warned About Excessive Personal
Internet Use During Work Time, Including Buying And Selling Goods For A Little Business
She Ran. The Claim That She Did Not Know About The Ethics Of Internet Use Was Not
Credible As The Policy Was Posted For All Employees Who Received E-Mails About Any
Changes To The Policy. The Fact That The Term ―Ethical‖ Was Used In The Policy Does
Not Likely Impact This Decision.
Answers To Ethics And Social Questions
1. The Federal Tax Code Is Riddled With Special-Interest Loopholes. Most Of These Exist
Because Firms And Trade Associations Lobby Congress And Provide Campaign Support To
Members Of Congress To Gain Special Favors To Individual Firms Or Industries. Is It
Ethical For Firms To Seek Special Privilege?
Answer: The Nature Of Our Political System Forces Firms To Participate In The Political
Process. Those That Fail To Do So, If They Are Of Any Size, Are More Likely To Be
Subject To Political Attack. In A Sense, Firms
―Buy‖ Protection By Keeping A Flow Of Contributions Going, Especially To Incumbent
Members Of Congress. Competition Also Means That If A Firm Does Not Lobby For
Special Privilege, Then It May Suffer If Competitors Achieve Such Status In The Tax
Code Or Some Area Of Regulation. Many Business Leaders Do Not Much Care For The
Washington, D.C. Operations Their Firms Support But Know That It Is A Part Of The
Modern Legal Environment Of Business.
2. “Fair Trade” Goods Have Become Popular, As Some People Are Willing To Pay More To
Know The Goods Come From Workers Paid A Decent Price For Their Efforts. However,
Some Retailers Who Sell Fair Trade Goods Mark Them Up Substantially More Than
Nonfair Trade Goods. One Study Showed That Coffee Growers Got An Average Of 44
Cents A
, =
Pound More For Fair Trade Coffee, But The Coffee At Retail Was Marked Up An Additional
$3.46 Per Pound. At One Supermarket Chain, Fair Trade Bananas That Cost An Extra
3.6 Cents Per Pound Were Marked Up Four Times The Price Of Non-Fair Trade Bananas.
Fair Trade Goods Are Claimed To Be A Form Of Social Responsibility. Is That True If It Just
Means Higher Profit Margins?
Answer: The High Mark Up Suppresses The Demand For Fair Trade Goods, Thereby
Reducing The Market For Fair Trade Goods. If The Retail Prices Reflected The Actual
Additional Cost, Not The Profit Maximizing Price To The Retailer That Exploits The
Goodwill From ―Fair Trade,‖ Then It Is Hard To Argue That The Company Is Being
Particularly Socially Responsible.
, =
3. A Chemical Company Located A New Plant In A Depressed Area With High
Unemployment In West Virginia. It Built A State-Of-The-Art Plant That Had The Latest
Pollution Control Technology Meeting All Epa Requirements. It Created 2,500 Jobs. The
Company Was Attacked For Polluting A Previously Pristine Area. Had The Plant Been
Built In An Industrial Area, Such As The Coast Near Houston, No One Would Have Been
Likely To Complain. Was The Company Socially Irresponsible For Building The Plant In
Such An Area?
Answer: The Company Was In A No-Win Situation. It Was Attacked By Environmentalists And
Some Locals For
―Destroying‖ The Environment, Even Though The Pollution Was Acceptable. When The
Company Later Stated It Would Close The Plant, Which As Not Profitable, It Came
Under Fire For Destroying Jobs. It Eventually Upgraded The Plant And Kept It Open,
But It Was Never A Profitable Operation. The Plant Should Probably Not Have Been
Built In Such A Remote Location, As That Made It A Target. Built In A Higher-Density
Area And There Would Have Been Fewer Issues As The Environmental Impact On An
Existing Industrial Area Would Have Been Small. Corporate Social Responsibility Can
Involve Difficult Tradeoffs That Do Not Always Allow A Win-Win Result.
4. Discussion Of Ethics Issues Focuses On Company Examples. What Personal Ethics
Matter? Surveys Indicate That Many Students Have Cheated In Classes One Way Or
Another, Pad Their Resumes When Seeking Jobs, And Have Improperly Downloaded
Copyrighted Music. Does Ethics “Begin At Home”?
Answer: If Ethics Is To Be Theoretical Or Applied Only In Formal Situations, Then It Means Little In
Practice.
Solution And Answer Guide
Meiners, The Legal Environment Of Business, 14e, 9780357451724; Chapter 2:
The Court System
Table Of Contents
Answer To Discussion Question ........................................................................................................ 4
Answers To Case Questions ................................................................................................................ 5
Answer To Ethics And Social Question ............................................................................................ 7
Answer To Discussion Question
Judges In Many Nations Are Trained For Their Offices In Law School. They Are Hired Into The
Judicial System And Work Their Way Up Through That System. In The United States, There Is
No Special Training To Be A Judge; It Is An Honor Bestowed, Usually On Senior Attorneys, Or It
Is An Office One Runs For In Some States. What Advantages Might The Other System Have Over
The
U.S. Method?
Answer: Judges In Europe And Japan Play A Quasi-Prosecutor Role, So They Are Quite
Different Than U.S. Judges. The Instruct Attorneys On What Evidence They Want To See.
, =
So In That Sense, Their Roles Are Quite Different. Further, Judges In Most Countries Do
Not Have As
SOLUTION MANUAL
LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF
BUSINESS
, =
Table Of Contents
➢ Chapter 1. Today’s Business Environment: Law And Ethics
➢ Chapter 2. The Court Systems
➢ Chapter 3. Trials And Resolving Disputes
➢ Chapter 4. The Constitution: Focus On Application To Business
➢ Chapter 5. Criminal Law And Business
➢ Chapter 6. Elements Of Torts
➢ Chapter 7. Business Torts And Product Liability
➢ Chapter 8. Real And Personal Property
➢ Chapter 9. Intellectual Property
➢ Chapter 10. Contracts
➢ Chapter 11. Domestic And International Sales
➢ Chapter 12. Business Organizations
➢ Chapter 13. Negotiable Instruments, Credit, And Bankruptcy
➢ Chapter 14. Agency And The Employment Relationship
➢ Chapter 15. Employment And Labor Regulations
➢ Chapter 16. Employment Discrimination
➢ Chapter 17. The Regulatory Process
➢ Chapter 18. Securities Regulation
➢ Chapter 19. Consumer Protection
➢ Chapter 20. Antitrust Law
➢ Chapter 21. Environmental Law
➢ Chapter 22. The International Legal Environment Of Business
, =
Chapter 1
Table Of Contents
Answer To Discussion Question ........................................................................................................ 1
Answers To Case Questions ................................................................................................................ 1
Answers To Ethics And Social Questions........................................................................................ 3
Answer To Discussion Question
Should The Common Law Maxim “Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse” Apply To An
Immigrant Who Speaks Little English And Was Not Educated In The United States? How
About For A Tourist Who Does Not Speak English? Everyone Knows Criminal Acts Are
Prohibited, But What About Subtler Rules That Differ Across Countries And So May Be
Misunderstood By Foreigners?
Answer: It Is Generally True That Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse. Citizens Are Deemed
To Have Constructive Knowledge Of The Law. Yet, As Well Known As This Rule Is, It Is
Surprising How Often It Is Proffered As An Excuse. (A Westlaw Search Cases Finds
Hundreds Of Examples). Examples Include: Deluco V. Dezi (Conn. Super) (Lack Of
Knowledge Regarding The State‘S Usury Laws Is No Excuse For The Inclusion Of An Illegal
Interest Rate In A Sales Contract); And Plumlee V. Paddock (Ignorance Of The Fact That
The Subject Matter Of The Contract Was Illegal Was Not Excuse). The Courts Have
Provided A Small Exception To The Rule When It Comes To People In Lack Of English
Language Skills.
Consider Flanery V. Kuska, (Defendant Did Not Speak English Was Advised By A Friend
That An Answer To A Complaint Was Not Required); Ramon V. Dept. Of Transportation,
(No English And An Inability To Understand The Law Required For An Excuse); Yurechko
V.
County Of Allegheny, (Ignorance And With The Fact That The Municipality Suffered No
Hardship In Late Lawsuit Filing Was An Excuse).
Answers To Case Questions
1. Facts From An English Judge’s Decision In 1884: “The Crew Of An English Yacht Were
Cast Away In
A Storm On The High Seas . . . And Were Compelled To Put Into An Open Boat. They Had
No Supply
Of Water And No Supply Of Food. . . . That On The Eighteenth Day . . . They Suggested
That One
Should Be Sacrificed To Save The Rest. . . . That Next Day . . . They ..... Went To The Boy
. ....................................................................................................................................................... Put A Knife
Into His Throat And Killed Him . . . The Three Men Fed Upon The Body Of The Boy
For Four Days; [Then]
The Boat Was Picked Up By A Passing Vessel, And [They] Were Rescued ......And Committed
For Trial. . . .
If The Men Had Not Fed Upon The Body Of The Boy They Would Probably Not Have
, =
Survived To Be So Picked Up And Rescued, But Wouldhave Died Of Famine. The Boy,
Being In A Much Weaker
Condition, Was Likely To Have Died Before Them The Real Question In This Case [Is]
Whether Killing
Under The Conditions Set Forth Be Or Be Not Murder.” Do You Consider The Acts To Be
Immoral?
[Regina V. Dudley And Stephens, 14 Queens Bench Division 273 (1884)]
Answer: This Points Out That The Legal System Has Limits. Its Acceptability Is Dictated By
Legal Culture--Which Determines Whether Law Will Be Enforced, Obeyed, Avoided, Or
Abused. It Is Limited By The Informal Rules Of The Society--Its Customs And Values. One
Limit Is The Extent To Which Society Will Allow The Formal Rules To Be Imposed When A
Crime Is Committed In Odd Circumstances. Here There Was An Intentional Murder. Does
The Motive For The Murder, The Effort To Save Several Lives By Sacrificing One
Life, Make It A Crime That Should Be Punished? Not All Crimes Are Treated The Same. It Also
Raises Questions About The Desirability Of Not Giving Judges Flexibility In Sentencing.
There Was A Precedent For A Light Sentence In This Case In U.S. Law: U.S. V. Holmes, 20
F. Cas. 360 (No. 15383) (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1842). The Case Involved A Sinking Ocean Liner.
Several Passengers Made It To The Only Lifeboat, Which Was Far Too Overcrowded. The
Captain Decided To Save The Women And Children And Threw Several Men Overboard. The
Lifeboat Was Rescued. The Grand Jury Refused To Indict The Captain From Murder, Only
For Manslaughter. He Got A Six Month Sentence.
The British Judge In The Case Here Imposed The Death Penalty Upon The Person Who
Survived. The Judge Found It Difficult To Rule That Every Man On Board Had The Right
To Make Law By His Own Hand. The Crown Reduced The Sentence To Six Months.
2. Smoking Is A Serious Health Hazard. Cigarettes Are Legal. Should Cigarette
Manufacturers Be Liable For The Serious Illnesses And Untimely Deaths Caused By Their
Unavoidably Dangerous Products, Even Though They Post A Warning On T he Package And
Consumers Voluntarily Assume The Health Risks By Smoking? [Cipollone V. Liggett
Group, Inc., 505 U.S. 504 (1992)]
Answer: The General Rule That Exists Now Is That Since The Government Has Ordered The
Posting Of Warning Labels On Cigarettes, And Since The Dangers Of Smoking Are Well
Known, Consumers Have Been Warned And Are Not Due Compensation If They Kill
Themselves By Smoking. The Cippoline Case, Since Reviewed By The Supreme Court,
Appears To Be Of Limited Impact Since The Victim Was Adjudged To Have Become
Addicted To Cigarettes Before The Warning Label Was Ordered In 1964. If Cigarette
Makers Were Held Responsible For All Health Problems Associated With Cigarettes,
Then, Like Alcohol And Other Dangerous Products, The Damages Would Likely B e So
High It Would Effectively Ban The Products. Presumably, In A Free Society If Adults Are
Clearly Informed Of The Risks Of Products That Cannot Be Made Safe, They Accept The
Risk.
Tobacco And Alcohol Producers Cannot Take The Dangers Out Of The Products Except
At The Margin By Encouraging Responsible Drinking And The Like. Are Drugs Like
Cocaine Different?
3. Two Eight-Year-Old Boys Were Seriously Injured When Riding Honda Mini-Trail Bikes.
The Boys Were Riding On Public Streets, Ran A Stop Sign, And Were Hit By A Truck. The
Bikes Had Clear Warning Labels On The Front Stating They Were Only For Off-Road Use.
The Manual Stated The Bikes Were Not To Be Used On Public Streets. The Parents Sued
Honda. The Supreme Court Of Washington Said One Basic Issue Existed: “Is A
Manufacturer Liable When Children Are Injured While Riding One Of Its Mini-Trail Bikes
On A Public Road In Violation Of Manufacturer And Parental Warnings?” Is It Unethical To
, =
Make Products Like Mini-Trail Bikes Children Will Use When We Know Accidents Like This
Will Happen? [Baughn
V. Honda Motor Co., 727 P.2d 655 Sup. Ct, Wash., (1986)]
Answer: The Court Found No Liability For The Manufacturers. There Was No Defect; The
Product Was Safe For Intended Use. Safety Instructions Were Clear; The Parents Let
The Boys Ride The Bikes. Anything Can Be Dangerous--Baseballs Are Dangerous When
They Hit The Head, Swings Are Dangerous When Kids Jump Out Of Them; There Is
Only So Much That Can Be Done To Make The Government The ―National Nanny‖ As
The Washington Post Once Said About Excessive Consumer Protection. Parents Must
Accept A High Degree Of Responsible For Their Own Children.
4. Johnson Controls Adopted A “Fetal Protection Policy” That Women Of Childbearing Age
Could Not Work In The Battery-Making Division Of The Company. Exposure To Lead In
The Battery Operation Could Cause Harm To Unborn Babies. The Company Was
Concerned About Possible Legal Liability For Injury Suffered By Babies Of Mothers Who
Had Worked In The Battery Division. The Supreme Court Held The Company Policy Was
Illegal. It Was An
, =
“Excuse For Denying Women Equal Employment Opportunities.” Is The Court Forcing
The Company To Be Unethical By Allowing Pregnant Women Who Ignore The Warnings
To Expose Their Babies To The Lead? [United Auto Workers V. Johnson Controls, 499
U.S.
187 (1991)]
Answer: The Court Held It A Form Of Sex Discrimination To Prevent Women Of Child-Bearing
Age From Holding The More Dangerous Jobs. The Company Argued That It Did This To
Protect Itself From Possible Liability In Case Of Damage To Babies And That The
Decision Was Ethical. The Replacements For These Workers Were Often Men Or More
Senior Women, Who Tended To Be Higher Income Workers, So This
, =
Was Not A Current Cost-Saving Move. Note That A 2002 Ruling Related To The Ada
Significantly Restricted This Earlier Case.
5. Mcgrory Worked For Applied Signal Technology In A Supervisory Position. He Was
Accused Of Violating The Company’s Policies On Sexual Harassment. An Internal
Investigation Determined He Did Not Violate The Policy But That He Was Evasive And
Violated The Company’s Personal Ethics Code. He Was Fired And Sued For Wrongful
Termination, Contending That If He Did Not Violate Sexual Harassment Rules He
Should Not Have Been Subject To Termination. Do Standards Of Law And Ethics Need
To Be The Same For An Employer? [Mcgrory V. Applied Signal Technology, 152
Cal.Rptr.3d 154 (2013)]
Answer: The Appeals Court Affirmed That The Employer Had The Right To Terminate The
Employee For Failure To Be Fully Cooperative In The Investigation Of The Complaint Of
Sexual Harassment That Had Been Filed Against Him. While He Was Not Found To Have
Violated The Harassment Policy, He Was Evasive And Uncooperative, Which Violated The
Company‘S Code Of Ethics, Which Was A Justification For Termination.
6. Baker Works As A Document Clerk For The Minnesota Supreme Court. After She Had
Worked There For 13 Years The Minnesota Judicial Branch Adopted A Policy
Concerning Proper Internet Use And Stated That Employees Must Adhere To The
Highest Ethical Standards When Using The Internet. Eleven Years Later, She Was
Fired For Excessive Surfing On The Internet During Working Hours. She Contended
She Did Not Know About The Policy. Is That An Adequate Defense For Her? [Baker V.
Minnesota Supreme Court, 2016 Wl 102513 (2016)]
Answer: The Minnesota High Court Held That Baker‘S Termination Was Proper. She Violated
Standards Expected Of Employees. She Had Been Warned About Excessive Personal
Internet Use During Work Time, Including Buying And Selling Goods For A Little Business
She Ran. The Claim That She Did Not Know About The Ethics Of Internet Use Was Not
Credible As The Policy Was Posted For All Employees Who Received E-Mails About Any
Changes To The Policy. The Fact That The Term ―Ethical‖ Was Used In The Policy Does
Not Likely Impact This Decision.
Answers To Ethics And Social Questions
1. The Federal Tax Code Is Riddled With Special-Interest Loopholes. Most Of These Exist
Because Firms And Trade Associations Lobby Congress And Provide Campaign Support To
Members Of Congress To Gain Special Favors To Individual Firms Or Industries. Is It
Ethical For Firms To Seek Special Privilege?
Answer: The Nature Of Our Political System Forces Firms To Participate In The Political
Process. Those That Fail To Do So, If They Are Of Any Size, Are More Likely To Be
Subject To Political Attack. In A Sense, Firms
―Buy‖ Protection By Keeping A Flow Of Contributions Going, Especially To Incumbent
Members Of Congress. Competition Also Means That If A Firm Does Not Lobby For
Special Privilege, Then It May Suffer If Competitors Achieve Such Status In The Tax
Code Or Some Area Of Regulation. Many Business Leaders Do Not Much Care For The
Washington, D.C. Operations Their Firms Support But Know That It Is A Part Of The
Modern Legal Environment Of Business.
2. “Fair Trade” Goods Have Become Popular, As Some People Are Willing To Pay More To
Know The Goods Come From Workers Paid A Decent Price For Their Efforts. However,
Some Retailers Who Sell Fair Trade Goods Mark Them Up Substantially More Than
Nonfair Trade Goods. One Study Showed That Coffee Growers Got An Average Of 44
Cents A
, =
Pound More For Fair Trade Coffee, But The Coffee At Retail Was Marked Up An Additional
$3.46 Per Pound. At One Supermarket Chain, Fair Trade Bananas That Cost An Extra
3.6 Cents Per Pound Were Marked Up Four Times The Price Of Non-Fair Trade Bananas.
Fair Trade Goods Are Claimed To Be A Form Of Social Responsibility. Is That True If It Just
Means Higher Profit Margins?
Answer: The High Mark Up Suppresses The Demand For Fair Trade Goods, Thereby
Reducing The Market For Fair Trade Goods. If The Retail Prices Reflected The Actual
Additional Cost, Not The Profit Maximizing Price To The Retailer That Exploits The
Goodwill From ―Fair Trade,‖ Then It Is Hard To Argue That The Company Is Being
Particularly Socially Responsible.
, =
3. A Chemical Company Located A New Plant In A Depressed Area With High
Unemployment In West Virginia. It Built A State-Of-The-Art Plant That Had The Latest
Pollution Control Technology Meeting All Epa Requirements. It Created 2,500 Jobs. The
Company Was Attacked For Polluting A Previously Pristine Area. Had The Plant Been
Built In An Industrial Area, Such As The Coast Near Houston, No One Would Have Been
Likely To Complain. Was The Company Socially Irresponsible For Building The Plant In
Such An Area?
Answer: The Company Was In A No-Win Situation. It Was Attacked By Environmentalists And
Some Locals For
―Destroying‖ The Environment, Even Though The Pollution Was Acceptable. When The
Company Later Stated It Would Close The Plant, Which As Not Profitable, It Came
Under Fire For Destroying Jobs. It Eventually Upgraded The Plant And Kept It Open,
But It Was Never A Profitable Operation. The Plant Should Probably Not Have Been
Built In Such A Remote Location, As That Made It A Target. Built In A Higher-Density
Area And There Would Have Been Fewer Issues As The Environmental Impact On An
Existing Industrial Area Would Have Been Small. Corporate Social Responsibility Can
Involve Difficult Tradeoffs That Do Not Always Allow A Win-Win Result.
4. Discussion Of Ethics Issues Focuses On Company Examples. What Personal Ethics
Matter? Surveys Indicate That Many Students Have Cheated In Classes One Way Or
Another, Pad Their Resumes When Seeking Jobs, And Have Improperly Downloaded
Copyrighted Music. Does Ethics “Begin At Home”?
Answer: If Ethics Is To Be Theoretical Or Applied Only In Formal Situations, Then It Means Little In
Practice.
Solution And Answer Guide
Meiners, The Legal Environment Of Business, 14e, 9780357451724; Chapter 2:
The Court System
Table Of Contents
Answer To Discussion Question ........................................................................................................ 4
Answers To Case Questions ................................................................................................................ 5
Answer To Ethics And Social Question ............................................................................................ 7
Answer To Discussion Question
Judges In Many Nations Are Trained For Their Offices In Law School. They Are Hired Into The
Judicial System And Work Their Way Up Through That System. In The United States, There Is
No Special Training To Be A Judge; It Is An Honor Bestowed, Usually On Senior Attorneys, Or It
Is An Office One Runs For In Some States. What Advantages Might The Other System Have Over
The
U.S. Method?
Answer: Judges In Europe And Japan Play A Quasi-Prosecutor Role, So They Are Quite
Different Than U.S. Judges. The Instruct Attorneys On What Evidence They Want To See.
, =
So In That Sense, Their Roles Are Quite Different. Further, Judges In Most Countries Do
Not Have As
