, SOLUTION MANUAL FOR The Legal Environment of Business 15th Edition
Meiners
Important Notes
The file includes the complete test bank, organized chapter by chapter.
A sample of selected pages has been provided for preview.
All available appendices and Excel files (if included in the original resources) are
provided.
We continuously update our files to ensure you receive the latest and most accurate
editions.
New editions are added regularly – stay connected for updates!
✅ Why Buy From Us?
📚 Complete & organized chapter-by-chapter – no missing content, no guessing.
⚡ Instant digital delivery – get your file the moment you pay, no waiting.
📅 Always up to date – we track new editions so you always get the latest version.
💬 Friendly support – real humans ready to help, anytime you need us.
🔒 Safe & secure – thousands of satisfied students trust us every semester.
🛡️Our Guarantees
💰 Money-Back Guarantee: Not satisfied? We offer a full refund – no questions asked.
🔄 Wrong File? No Problem: Contact us and we will replace it immediately with the
correct version, free of charge.
⏰ 24/7 Support: We are always here – reach out anytime and expect a fast response.
Contact Email:
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
Solution and Answer Guide
MEINERS, RINGLEB, EDWARDS, THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS, 2027, 15E,
9798214056449; CHAPTER 1: TODAY’S BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT: LAW AND ETHICS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Discussion Question and Answer ............................................................................................. 1
Case Questions and Answers....................................................................................................1
Ethics and Social Questions and Answers...............................................................................4
DISCUSSION QUESTION AND ANSWER
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 of 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 an excuse). The courts have provided a small exception to the
rule when it comes to people with limited English language skills. Consider Flanery v. Kuska (a defendant
who did not speak English was advised by a friend that an answer to a complaint was not required),
Ramon v. Dept. of Transportation (no understanding of English and an inability to understand the law
required was an excuse), and Yurechko v. County of Allegheny (ignorance of the law and the fact that the
municipality suffered no hardship because of the late lawsuit filing was an excuse).
CASE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
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 would . . . have 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)]
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 1
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
Answer:
This question points out that the legal system has limits. Its acceptability is dictated by legal
culture-, which determines whether laws will be enforced, obeyed, avoided, or abused. It is limited
by the informal rules of 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 (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 for murder, only for manslaughter. He got a six-month sentence.
The British judge in this case 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 the 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 the dangers of smoking are well known, consumers have been warned
and are not due compensation if they kill themselves by smoking. The Cipollone 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 other
dangerous products, the damages would likely be 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 taking actions such as encouraging responsible drinking.
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, and the parents let the boys ride the bikes. Anything
can be dangerous; baseballs are dangerous when they hit the head, and 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 responsibility for their own children. Ethics and legal
standards are not the same thing.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 2
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
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 to be 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 and was a justification for
termination.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 3
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
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 small 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 also 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.
ETHICS AND SOCIAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
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, it may suffer
if competitors achieve some special privilege in the tax code or another area of regulation. Many
business leaders do not much care for the Washington, D.C., operations their firms support but
know 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
non-fair-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 markup suppresses the demand for fair trade goods, thereby reducing the market for
fair trade goods.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 4
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
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 was 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 because that made it a target. If it
had been built in a higher-density area, there would have been fewer issues because 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.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 5
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 2: The Court Systems
Solution and Answer Guide
MEINERS, RINGLEB, EDWARDS, THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS, 2027, 15E,
9798214056449; CHAPTER 2: THE COURT SYSTEMS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Discussion Question and Answer ............................................................................................. 1
Case Questions and Answers....................................................................................................1
Ethics and Social Question and Answer...................................................................................4
DISCUSSION QUESTION AND ANSWER
1. 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. They 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 much independence as U.S.
judges. Not relying on the legislature or executive to retain a job and having the power to strike
down statutes for violating constitutional rights is important to the integrity of the U.S. system and its
structure. This does not address the issue of competence, but I have never seen a study that tries
to address that issue.
CASE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1. The Zamora family from Illinois rented a house in Maine via Airbnb. When in the house, one of
the Zamora children played with matches and set a fire that killed two members of the family.
Zamora sued the homeowners and the maker of smoke detectors in state court in Illinois. They
contended that the detectors were inadequate to protect the Zamoras. Would Illinois courts have
jurisdiction over defendants? [Zamora v. Lewis, 146 N.E.3d 231, App. Ct. IL (2019)]
Answer:
Illinois trial court and appeals court held they had no jurisdiction over defendants. A temporary
renter has only a “fleeting arrangement” with the homeowner. The homeowner was not
attempting to do business in Illinois; the home was available to anyone on Airbnb. The smoke
detector makers did business in Illinois, but the detectors were not purchased in Illinois or
installed in Illinois, and the alleged defect did not occur in Illinois. Illinois courts did not claim
jurisdiction.
2. Charlotte Chambers and other South Dakota residents chartered a bus in South Dakota from
Dakotah Charter, a South Dakota corporation, to attend a Tae Kwon Do tournament in Arkansas.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 1
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 2: The Court Systems
While en route from South Dakota to Arkansas, the bus stopped in Missouri. Chambers fell on the
steps in the bus and broke her ankle. She sued, claiming that Dakotah failed to maintain the bus
in a safe condition. Dakotah contended that the plaintiff’s carelessness caused her injury.
Which law should apply to the case—the law of South Dakota, where the contract was made;
Missouri, where the injury occurred; or Arkansas, where the contract was ultimately to be
performed? [Charlotte Chambers v. Dakotah Charter, 488 NW.2d 63, Sup. Ct., S.D. (1992)]
Answer:
The traditional rule—apply the law where the injury occurred—would call for the application of
Missouri law. Here, the court, like many jurisdictions, rejected the traditional rule and adopted the
significant interests test. “The rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to an issue in tort are
determined by the local law of the state which, with respect to that issue, has the most significant
relationship to the occurrence and the parties under the principles stated in [the Restatement
(2d)].”
“South Dakota has all of the important contacts. First, the principal conduct which allegedly
caused the injury was the distribution of the candy in the bus on the first leg of the trip. Missouri
had no contact with that conduct. Even if Missouri could claim some limited contact with Dakota
Charter’s alleged failure to maintain a safe premises after the candy was distributed, Missouri’s
contact was relatively unimportant to the issue of comparative negligence because comparative
negligence law is not a rule of the road nor does it regulate the conduct of bus companies using
Missouri’s highways…
Second, South Dakota was the domicile, residence, place of incorporation and place of business
of the parties, as well as the place where the relationship of the parties was centered. These
contacts are important to the issue of comparative negligence because the economic impact of
the law applied will be felt where the parties reside.”
Applying the tests from the Restatement:
(a) the needs of the interstate and international systems,
“First, neither Missouri nor South Dakota’s laws significantly affect the needs of interstate
systems because neither interstate relations nor automobile movement would be influenced
by either law.”
(b) the relevant policies of the forum,
“This state’s policy has been clearly expressed by the legislature in our comparative
negligence statute.”
(c) the relevant policies of other interested states and the relative interests of those states in the
determination of the particular issue,
“Although Missouri also has a comparative negligence policy, South Dakota has the only
significant interest in a determination of the comparative negligence issue because all of the
contacts are in South Dakota, and Missouri’s policy would not be furthered by its application to
South Dakota domiciliaries who have no important contact with Missouri. Where the forum’s
interests are the “most deeply affected” under these factors, it is generally fitting that forum’s
law should be applied.”
(d) the protection of justified expectations,
“The protection of justified expectancy, although important in consensual relationships, has
no importance in this negligence action. Generally, people do not consider the legal
consequences of their conduct or how law may be applied prior to becoming involved in an
accident.”
(e) the basic policies underlying the particular field of law,
“The policy of ameliorating the harsh consequences of common law contributory negligence
rules is furthered by both states’ comparative negligence laws. Although Chambers argue
that Missouri’s policy is better, that contention is debatable. Furthermore, even if Missouri’s
policy could be considered ‘better,’ conflicts analysis should not be used to apply the law of a
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 2
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 2: The Court Systems
state that has no interest in having its rule applied. The proper solution in such cases is to
change the forum’s inferior law.”
(f) certainty, predictability and uniformity of result,
“Little significance can be attached to the ease of determining and applying comparative
negligence law or to the certainty, predictability and uniformity of result. Both states’ laws are
easy to determine and apply. Furthermore, because the differences in the law are so minor,
there will be few differences in result.”
(g) ease in the determination and application of the law to be applied.
“Both states’ laws are easy to determine and apply. Furthermore, because the differences in
the law are so minor, there will be few differences in result.”
3. Edwards received unsolicited faxes from Direct Access in violation of the Federal Telephone
Consumer Protection Act, which makes it illegal to send unsolicited faxes. Edwards, a Nevada
resident, sued Direct, not a Nevada resident, in state court in Nevada for damages allowed under
the law. Direct contended that the suit could not be filed in state court because it concerned federal
law, so Nevada courts did not have jurisdiction. Is that correct? [Edwards v. Direct Access, 124 P.3d
1158, Sup. Ct, Nev. (2005)]
Answer:
The Nevada Supreme Court held that state courts had jurisdiction. The courts have personal
jurisdiction because Direct did business in Nevada by intentionally sending offers to people in
Nevada by their fax machines. The Nevada court cited the U.S. Supreme Court that state courts
are empowered to hear cases based on federal law unless forbidden by Congress from doing so.
Since Congress said nothing about jurisdiction in the Act, the states are presumed to have
jurisdiction over the subject matter. The court also noted that if the Nevada legislature instructed
the courts not to accept cases based on this Act, then they would not have jurisdiction, but that
had not happened either.
4. Pueblo De Bahia Lora, S.A., is a Costa Rican corporation owned by U.S. citizens. It operates a
fishing resort in Costa Rica called “Parrot Bay Village.” Oldfield, a Florida resident, saw the Parrot
Bay website, which is in English, uses a U.S. mailing address, and provides a toll-free number for
potential guests to call. Oldfield made a reservation online. When at the resort, he went on a
fishing trip on a charter boat. That arrangement was made by Parrot Bay, but the boat was owned
and operated by a Costa Rican. Oldfield suffered an injury he claims was due to the negligence of
the boat operator. He sued Parrot Bay in federal court, claiming diversity of citizenship. Parrot
Bay did not respond; Oldfield was awarded a default judgment for $750,000 as requested. Parrot
Bay appealed. What argument is on Parrot Bay’s side? [Oldfield v. Pueblo de Bahia Lora, S.A.,
558 F.3d 1210, 11th Cir. (2009)]
Answer:
Vacated and remanded. The district court lacked jurisdiction, so the judgment is void. Parrot Bay,
a foreign corporation, is not responsible for the actions of the fishing boat operator, another
foreign entity. The relationship between Parrot Bay and the fishing boat operator did not arise out
of, or relate to, Parrot Bay’s contacts with the United States. It was not foreseeable by Parrot Bay
that Oldfield might suffer an injury on a boat that it did not own or operate while he stayed at
Parrot Bay as a result of his having visited the resort’s website and made a reservation for a room
there. Therefore, Parrot Bay cannot be subject to U.S. court jurisdiction in this matter. Oldfield
can pursue his claim against the fishing boat operator in court in Costa Rica.
5. An accident in Florida killed three of the four members of a family from Alabama who were riding
in their Kia automobile bought in Alabama. Suit was filed in Alabama state court against Kia by
the survivor of the accident. Kia requested the trial be moved to Florida on the ground of forum
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 3
website, in whole or in part.
Meiners
Important Notes
The file includes the complete test bank, organized chapter by chapter.
A sample of selected pages has been provided for preview.
All available appendices and Excel files (if included in the original resources) are
provided.
We continuously update our files to ensure you receive the latest and most accurate
editions.
New editions are added regularly – stay connected for updates!
✅ Why Buy From Us?
📚 Complete & organized chapter-by-chapter – no missing content, no guessing.
⚡ Instant digital delivery – get your file the moment you pay, no waiting.
📅 Always up to date – we track new editions so you always get the latest version.
💬 Friendly support – real humans ready to help, anytime you need us.
🔒 Safe & secure – thousands of satisfied students trust us every semester.
🛡️Our Guarantees
💰 Money-Back Guarantee: Not satisfied? We offer a full refund – no questions asked.
🔄 Wrong File? No Problem: Contact us and we will replace it immediately with the
correct version, free of charge.
⏰ 24/7 Support: We are always here – reach out anytime and expect a fast response.
Contact Email:
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
Solution and Answer Guide
MEINERS, RINGLEB, EDWARDS, THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS, 2027, 15E,
9798214056449; CHAPTER 1: TODAY’S BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT: LAW AND ETHICS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Discussion Question and Answer ............................................................................................. 1
Case Questions and Answers....................................................................................................1
Ethics and Social Questions and Answers...............................................................................4
DISCUSSION QUESTION AND ANSWER
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 of 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 an excuse). The courts have provided a small exception to the
rule when it comes to people with limited English language skills. Consider Flanery v. Kuska (a defendant
who did not speak English was advised by a friend that an answer to a complaint was not required),
Ramon v. Dept. of Transportation (no understanding of English and an inability to understand the law
required was an excuse), and Yurechko v. County of Allegheny (ignorance of the law and the fact that the
municipality suffered no hardship because of the late lawsuit filing was an excuse).
CASE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
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 would . . . have 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)]
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 1
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
Answer:
This question points out that the legal system has limits. Its acceptability is dictated by legal
culture-, which determines whether laws will be enforced, obeyed, avoided, or abused. It is limited
by the informal rules of 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 (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 for murder, only for manslaughter. He got a six-month sentence.
The British judge in this case 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 the 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 the dangers of smoking are well known, consumers have been warned
and are not due compensation if they kill themselves by smoking. The Cipollone 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 other
dangerous products, the damages would likely be 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 taking actions such as encouraging responsible drinking.
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, and the parents let the boys ride the bikes. Anything
can be dangerous; baseballs are dangerous when they hit the head, and 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 responsibility for their own children. Ethics and legal
standards are not the same thing.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 2
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
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 to be 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 and was a justification for
termination.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 3
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
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 small 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 also 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.
ETHICS AND SOCIAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
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, it may suffer
if competitors achieve some special privilege in the tax code or another area of regulation. Many
business leaders do not much care for the Washington, D.C., operations their firms support but
know 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
non-fair-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 markup suppresses the demand for fair trade goods, thereby reducing the market for
fair trade goods.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 4
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 1: Today’s Business Environment: Law and Ethics
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 was 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 because that made it a target. If it
had been built in a higher-density area, there would have been fewer issues because 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.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 5
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 2: The Court Systems
Solution and Answer Guide
MEINERS, RINGLEB, EDWARDS, THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS, 2027, 15E,
9798214056449; CHAPTER 2: THE COURT SYSTEMS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Discussion Question and Answer ............................................................................................. 1
Case Questions and Answers....................................................................................................1
Ethics and Social Question and Answer...................................................................................4
DISCUSSION QUESTION AND ANSWER
1. 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. They 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 much independence as U.S.
judges. Not relying on the legislature or executive to retain a job and having the power to strike
down statutes for violating constitutional rights is important to the integrity of the U.S. system and its
structure. This does not address the issue of competence, but I have never seen a study that tries
to address that issue.
CASE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1. The Zamora family from Illinois rented a house in Maine via Airbnb. When in the house, one of
the Zamora children played with matches and set a fire that killed two members of the family.
Zamora sued the homeowners and the maker of smoke detectors in state court in Illinois. They
contended that the detectors were inadequate to protect the Zamoras. Would Illinois courts have
jurisdiction over defendants? [Zamora v. Lewis, 146 N.E.3d 231, App. Ct. IL (2019)]
Answer:
Illinois trial court and appeals court held they had no jurisdiction over defendants. A temporary
renter has only a “fleeting arrangement” with the homeowner. The homeowner was not
attempting to do business in Illinois; the home was available to anyone on Airbnb. The smoke
detector makers did business in Illinois, but the detectors were not purchased in Illinois or
installed in Illinois, and the alleged defect did not occur in Illinois. Illinois courts did not claim
jurisdiction.
2. Charlotte Chambers and other South Dakota residents chartered a bus in South Dakota from
Dakotah Charter, a South Dakota corporation, to attend a Tae Kwon Do tournament in Arkansas.
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 1
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 2: The Court Systems
While en route from South Dakota to Arkansas, the bus stopped in Missouri. Chambers fell on the
steps in the bus and broke her ankle. She sued, claiming that Dakotah failed to maintain the bus
in a safe condition. Dakotah contended that the plaintiff’s carelessness caused her injury.
Which law should apply to the case—the law of South Dakota, where the contract was made;
Missouri, where the injury occurred; or Arkansas, where the contract was ultimately to be
performed? [Charlotte Chambers v. Dakotah Charter, 488 NW.2d 63, Sup. Ct., S.D. (1992)]
Answer:
The traditional rule—apply the law where the injury occurred—would call for the application of
Missouri law. Here, the court, like many jurisdictions, rejected the traditional rule and adopted the
significant interests test. “The rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to an issue in tort are
determined by the local law of the state which, with respect to that issue, has the most significant
relationship to the occurrence and the parties under the principles stated in [the Restatement
(2d)].”
“South Dakota has all of the important contacts. First, the principal conduct which allegedly
caused the injury was the distribution of the candy in the bus on the first leg of the trip. Missouri
had no contact with that conduct. Even if Missouri could claim some limited contact with Dakota
Charter’s alleged failure to maintain a safe premises after the candy was distributed, Missouri’s
contact was relatively unimportant to the issue of comparative negligence because comparative
negligence law is not a rule of the road nor does it regulate the conduct of bus companies using
Missouri’s highways…
Second, South Dakota was the domicile, residence, place of incorporation and place of business
of the parties, as well as the place where the relationship of the parties was centered. These
contacts are important to the issue of comparative negligence because the economic impact of
the law applied will be felt where the parties reside.”
Applying the tests from the Restatement:
(a) the needs of the interstate and international systems,
“First, neither Missouri nor South Dakota’s laws significantly affect the needs of interstate
systems because neither interstate relations nor automobile movement would be influenced
by either law.”
(b) the relevant policies of the forum,
“This state’s policy has been clearly expressed by the legislature in our comparative
negligence statute.”
(c) the relevant policies of other interested states and the relative interests of those states in the
determination of the particular issue,
“Although Missouri also has a comparative negligence policy, South Dakota has the only
significant interest in a determination of the comparative negligence issue because all of the
contacts are in South Dakota, and Missouri’s policy would not be furthered by its application to
South Dakota domiciliaries who have no important contact with Missouri. Where the forum’s
interests are the “most deeply affected” under these factors, it is generally fitting that forum’s
law should be applied.”
(d) the protection of justified expectations,
“The protection of justified expectancy, although important in consensual relationships, has
no importance in this negligence action. Generally, people do not consider the legal
consequences of their conduct or how law may be applied prior to becoming involved in an
accident.”
(e) the basic policies underlying the particular field of law,
“The policy of ameliorating the harsh consequences of common law contributory negligence
rules is furthered by both states’ comparative negligence laws. Although Chambers argue
that Missouri’s policy is better, that contention is debatable. Furthermore, even if Missouri’s
policy could be considered ‘better,’ conflicts analysis should not be used to apply the law of a
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 2
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Meiners, Ringleb, Edwards, The Legal Environment of Business, 2027, 15e,
9798214056449; Chapter 2: The Court Systems
state that has no interest in having its rule applied. The proper solution in such cases is to
change the forum’s inferior law.”
(f) certainty, predictability and uniformity of result,
“Little significance can be attached to the ease of determining and applying comparative
negligence law or to the certainty, predictability and uniformity of result. Both states’ laws are
easy to determine and apply. Furthermore, because the differences in the law are so minor,
there will be few differences in result.”
(g) ease in the determination and application of the law to be applied.
“Both states’ laws are easy to determine and apply. Furthermore, because the differences in
the law are so minor, there will be few differences in result.”
3. Edwards received unsolicited faxes from Direct Access in violation of the Federal Telephone
Consumer Protection Act, which makes it illegal to send unsolicited faxes. Edwards, a Nevada
resident, sued Direct, not a Nevada resident, in state court in Nevada for damages allowed under
the law. Direct contended that the suit could not be filed in state court because it concerned federal
law, so Nevada courts did not have jurisdiction. Is that correct? [Edwards v. Direct Access, 124 P.3d
1158, Sup. Ct, Nev. (2005)]
Answer:
The Nevada Supreme Court held that state courts had jurisdiction. The courts have personal
jurisdiction because Direct did business in Nevada by intentionally sending offers to people in
Nevada by their fax machines. The Nevada court cited the U.S. Supreme Court that state courts
are empowered to hear cases based on federal law unless forbidden by Congress from doing so.
Since Congress said nothing about jurisdiction in the Act, the states are presumed to have
jurisdiction over the subject matter. The court also noted that if the Nevada legislature instructed
the courts not to accept cases based on this Act, then they would not have jurisdiction, but that
had not happened either.
4. Pueblo De Bahia Lora, S.A., is a Costa Rican corporation owned by U.S. citizens. It operates a
fishing resort in Costa Rica called “Parrot Bay Village.” Oldfield, a Florida resident, saw the Parrot
Bay website, which is in English, uses a U.S. mailing address, and provides a toll-free number for
potential guests to call. Oldfield made a reservation online. When at the resort, he went on a
fishing trip on a charter boat. That arrangement was made by Parrot Bay, but the boat was owned
and operated by a Costa Rican. Oldfield suffered an injury he claims was due to the negligence of
the boat operator. He sued Parrot Bay in federal court, claiming diversity of citizenship. Parrot
Bay did not respond; Oldfield was awarded a default judgment for $750,000 as requested. Parrot
Bay appealed. What argument is on Parrot Bay’s side? [Oldfield v. Pueblo de Bahia Lora, S.A.,
558 F.3d 1210, 11th Cir. (2009)]
Answer:
Vacated and remanded. The district court lacked jurisdiction, so the judgment is void. Parrot Bay,
a foreign corporation, is not responsible for the actions of the fishing boat operator, another
foreign entity. The relationship between Parrot Bay and the fishing boat operator did not arise out
of, or relate to, Parrot Bay’s contacts with the United States. It was not foreseeable by Parrot Bay
that Oldfield might suffer an injury on a boat that it did not own or operate while he stayed at
Parrot Bay as a result of his having visited the resort’s website and made a reservation for a room
there. Therefore, Parrot Bay cannot be subject to U.S. court jurisdiction in this matter. Oldfield
can pursue his claim against the fishing boat operator in court in Costa Rica.
5. An accident in Florida killed three of the four members of a family from Alabama who were riding
in their Kia automobile bought in Alabama. Suit was filed in Alabama state court against Kia by
the survivor of the accident. Kia requested the trial be moved to Florida on the ground of forum
© 2027 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 3
website, in whole or in part.
