,Solution manual for Business Law Today, Standard
Text & Summarized Cases, 13th Edition Roger
LeRoy Miller
Notes
1- All Chapters are step by step.
2- We have shown you 10 pages.
3- The file contains all Appendix and Excel
sheet if it exists.
4- We have all what you need, we make
update at every time. There are many new
editions waiting you.
5- If you think you purchased the wrong file
You can contact us at every time, we can
replace it with true one.
Our email:
, Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
Solution and Answer Guide
Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
Table of Contents
Critical Thinking Questions in Features .................................................................................................................. 1
Managerial Strategy—Business Questions ................................................................................................ 1
Chapter Review ................................................................................................................................................................ 2
Practice and Review .................................................................................................................................. 2
Practice and Review: Debate This ............................................................................................................. 2
Issue Spotters ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Business Scenarios and Case Problems ..................................................................................................... 3
Critical Thinking and Writing Assignments ................................................................................................ 7
Appendix Exhibit ........................................................................................................................................ 8
Critical Thinking Questions in Features
Managerial Strategy—Business Questions
1. “When faced with a clearly erroneous precedent, my rule is simple,” writes Supreme Court Justice
Clarence Thomas. “We should not follow it.” How do these words offer a cautionary tale for
managers relying on stare decisis to make business decisions?
Solution
Simply put, the doctrine of stare decisis applies in all instances, except when it does not. As noted
in the text, a court is able to depart from precedent if it feels that legal, social, or technological
changes have rendered the previous decision untenable. In this case, just because the United
State Supreme Court believes, at present, that automobile salespeople are exempt from the
overtime rules of the FLSA, there is a possibility that the Court could reverse itself in the future. In
this context, managers need to be aware that (1) any decision they make based on a court
decision is subject to change, and (2) if they believe that a previous business law-related court
decision is flawed, they can challenge it in court.
2. Should Roberta consider paying her salespeople overtime even though it is not required by
federal law? Why or why not?
Solution
Just because Roberta is legally able to avoid paying the salespeople at her new used car
dealership overtime, should she? As with so many managerial decisions, the answer to this
question involves the tricky determination of costs and benefits. On the one hand, Roberta’s costs
will be lower if she does not have to pay overtime to the salespeople. On the other hand, the
salespeople may be more motivated if they feel they are being properly compensated for the
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
extra hours they spend on the lot. The extra motivation will likely lead to additional sales, which
very well may offset the overtime costs.
Chapter Review
Practice and Review
Suppose that the California legislature passes a law that severely restricts carbon dioxide emissions of
automobiles in that state. A group of automobile manufacturers files a suit against the state of
California to prevent enforcement of the law. The automakers claim that a federal law already sets fuel
economy standards nationwide and that these standards are essentially the same as carbon dioxide
emission standards. According to the automobile manufacturers, it is unfair to allow California to
impose more stringent regulations than those set by the federal law. Using the information presented
in the chapter, answer the following questions.
1. Who are the parties (the plaintiffs and the defendant) in this lawsuit?
Solution
In this situation, the automobile manufacturers are the plaintiffs, and the state of California is the
defendant.
2. Are the plaintiffs seeking a legal remedy or an equitable remedy? Why?
Solution
The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction, which is an equitable remedy, to prevent the state of
California from enforcing its statute restricting carbon dioxide emissions.
3. What is the primary source of the law that is at issue here?
Solution
This case involves a law passed by the California legislature and a federal statute, thus the primary
source of law is statutory law.
4. Read through the appendix that follows this chapter, and then answer the following question:
Where would you look to find the relevant California and federal laws?
Solution
Federal statutes are found in the United States Code, and California statutes are published in the
California Code. You would look in both of these sources to find the relevant state and federal
statutes.
Practice and Review: Debate This
1. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts are obligated to follow the precedents established in
their jurisdictions unless there is a compelling reason not to. Should U.S. courts continue to
adhere to this common law principle, given that our government now regulates so many areas by
statute?
Solution
Both England and the U.S. legal systems were constructed on the common law system. The
doctrine of stare decisis has always been a major part of this system—courts should follow
precedents when they are clearly established, excepted when compelling reasons dictate
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
otherwise. Even though more common law is being turned into statutory law, the doctrine of stare
decisis is still valid. After all, statutes often must to be interpreted by courts. What better basis for
judges to render their decisions than by basing them on precedents related to the subject at
hand?
In contrast, some students may argue that the doctrine of stare decisis is passé. There is certainly
less common law governing, say, environmental law than there was 100 years ago. Given that
federal and state governments increasingly are regulating more aspects of commercial
transactions between merchants and consumers, perhaps the courts should simply stick to
statutory language when disputes arise.
Issue Spotters
1. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides protection for the free exercise of religion.
A state legislature enacts a law that outlaws all religions that do not derive from the Judeo-
Christian tradition. Is this law valid within that state? Why or why not?
Solution
No. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and applies to all jurisdictions. A law in
violation of the Constitution (in this question, the First Amendment to the Constitution) will be
declared unconstitutional.
2. Apex Corporation learns that a federal administrative agency is considering a rule that will have a
negative impact on the firm’s ability to do business. Does the firm have any opportunity to
express its opinion about the pending rule? Explain.
Solution
Yes. Administrative rulemaking starts with the publication of a notice of the rulemaking in the
Federal Register. Among other details, this notice states where and when the proceedings, such as
a public hearing, will be held. Proponents and opponents can offer their comments and concerns
regarding the pending rule. After reviewing all the comments from the proceedings, the agency’s
decision makers consider what was presented and draft the final rule.
Business Scenarios and Case Problems
1. Binding versus Persuasive Authority. A county court in Illinois is deciding a case involving an
issue that has never been addressed before in that state’s courts. The Iowa Supreme Court,
however, recently decided a case involving a very similar fact pattern. Is the Illinois court obligated
to follow the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision on the issue? If the United States Supreme Court had
decided a similar case, would that decision be binding on the Illinois court? Explain. (See The
Common Law.)
Solution
A decision of a court is binding on all inferior courts. Because no state’s court is inferior to any
other state’s court, no state’s court is obligated to follow the decision of another state’s court on
an issue. The decision may be persuasive, however, depending on the nature of the case and the
particular judge hearing it. A decision of the United States Supreme Court on an issue is binding,
like the decision of any higher court, on all inferior courts. The United States Supreme Court is
the nation’s highest court, however, and thus, its decisions are binding on all courts, including
state courts.
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
2. Sources of Law. This chapter discussed a number of sources of American law. Which source of
law takes priority in the following situations, and why? (See Sources of American Law.)
1. A federal statute conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.
Solution
1. The U.S. Constitution—The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. A law in violation
of the Constitution, no matter what its source, will be declared unconstitutional and will not
be enforced.
2. A federal statute conflicts with a state constitutional provision.
Solution
2. The federal statute—Under the U.S. Constitution, when there is a conflict between a federal
law and a state law, the state law is rendered invalid.
3. A state statute conflicts with the common law of that state.
Solution
3. The state statute—State statutes are enacted by state legislatures. Areas not covered by state
statutory law are governed by state case law.
4. A state constitutional amendment conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.
Solution
4. The U.S. Constitution—State constitutions are supreme within their respective borders unless
they conflict with the U.S. Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.
3. Remedies. Arthur Rabe is suing Xavier Sanchez for breaching a contract in which Sanchez
promised to sell Rabe a Van Gogh painting for $150,000. (See The Common Law.)
1. In this lawsuit, who is the plaintiff, and who is the defendant?
Solution
1. In a suit by Arthur Rabe against Xavier Sanchez, Rabe is the plaintiff and Sanchez is the
defendant.
2. If Rabe wants Sanchez to perform the contract as promised, what remedy should Rabe seek?
Solution
2. Specific performance is the remedy that includes an order to a party to perform a contract as
promised.
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
3. Suppose that Rabe wants to cancel the contract because Sanchez fraudulently misrepresented
the painting as an original Van Gogh when in fact it is a copy. In this situation, what remedy
should Rabe seek?
Solution
3. Rescission is a remedy that includes an order to cancel a contract.
4. Will the remedy Rabe seeks in either situation be a remedy at law or a remedy in equity?
Solution
4. In both cases, these remedies are remedies in equity.
4. Philosophy of Law. After World War II ended in 1945, an international tribunal of judges
convened at Nuremberg, Germany. The judges convicted several Nazi war criminals of “crimes
against humanity.” Assuming that the Nazis who were convicted had not disobeyed any law of
their country and had merely been following their government’s (Hitler’s) orders, what law had
they violated? Explain. (See The Common Law.)
Solution
Crimes against humanity constituted, at the time of the Nuremberg trials, a new international
crime, consisting of “murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts
committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political,
racial or religious ground.” In response to the defendants’ assertion that they had only been
following orders, the Nuremberg judges explained in part that these were familiar crimes within
domestic jurisdictions and that thus the accused must have known, when they committed their
acts, that they would be considered criminal.
In terms of a philosophy of law, it might be said that these criminals violated “natural law.” The
oldest and one of the most significant schools of jurisprudence is the natural law school. Those
who adhere to the natural law school of thought believe that government and the legal system
should reflect universal moral and ethical principles that are inherent in human nature. Because
natural law is universal, it takes on a higher order than positive, or conventional, law. The natural
law tradition presupposes that the legitimacy of conventional, or positive, law derives from natural
law. Whenever it conflicts with natural law, conventional law loses its legitimacy. For example, a
precept of natural law may be that murder is wrong, which is a value reflected by specific laws
prohibiting murder. If a specific, written law requires murder, it conflicts with the natural law
precept, in which case individuals should disobey the written law and obey the natural law.
5. Spotlight on AOL—Common Law. AOL, LLC, mistakenly made public the personal information
of 650,000 of its members. The members filed a suit, alleging violations of California law. AOL
asked the court to dismiss the suit on the basis of a “forum-selection” clause in its member
agreement that designates Virginia courts as the place where member disputes will be tried.
Under a decision of the United States Supreme Court, a forum-selection clause is unenforceable
“if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy of the forum in which suit is brought.”
California has declared in other cases that the AOL clause contravenes a strong public policy. If
the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis, will it dismiss the suit? Explain. [Doe 1 v. AOL, LLC,
552 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2009)] (See The Common Law.)
Solution
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
The doctrine of stare decisis is the process of deciding cases with reference to former decisions, or
precedents. Under this doctrine, judges are obligated to follow the precedents established within
their jurisdiction.
In this problem, the enforceability of a forum selection clause is at issue. There are two precedents
mentioned in the facts that the court can apply. The United States Supreme Court has held that a
forum selection clause is unenforceable “if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy
of the forum in which suit is brought.” And California has declared in other cases that the AOL
clause contravenes a strong public policy. If the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis, it will
allow the suit to move forward.
In the actual case on which this problem is based, the court determined that the clause is not
enforceable under those precedents.
6. Business Case Problem with Sample Answer— Reading Citations. Assume that you want to
read the entire court opinion in the case of Friends of Buckingham v. State Air Pollution Control
Board, 947 F.3d 68 (4th Cir. 2020).
Refer to the appendix to this chapter, and then explain specifically where you would find the
court’s opinion. (See Finding Case Law.)
—For a sample answer to Problem 1–6, go to Appendix E.
Solution
The court’s opinion in the case Friends of Buckingham v. State Air Pollution Control Board can be
found in volume 947 of the Federal Reporter, third series, on page 68. The Federal Reporter
contains the decisions of all the United States Courts of Appeals, including, as is the case here, the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Also, this case was decided (though not necessarily filed) in 2020.
7. A Question of Ethics—The Doctrine of Precedent. Sandra White operated a travel agency. To
obtain lower airline fares for her nonmilitary clients, she booked military-rate travel by forwarding
fake military identification cards to the airlines. The government charged White with identity theft,
which requires the “use” of another’s identification. The trial court had two cases that represented
precedents.
In the first case, David Miller obtained a loan to buy land by representing that certain investors
had approved the loan when, in fact, they had not. Miller’s conviction for identity theft was
overturned because he had merely said that the investors had done something when they had
not. According to the court, this was not the “use” of another’s identification.
In the second case, Kathy Medlock, an ambulance service operator, had transported patients for
whom there was no medical necessity to do so. To obtain payment, Medlock had forged a
physician’s signature. The court concluded that this was “use” of another person’s identity. [United
States v. White, 846 F.3d 170 (6th Cir. 2017)] (See Sources of American Law.)
1. Which precedent—the Miller case or the Medlock case—is similar to White’s situation, and
why?
Solution
In this problem, White operated a travel agency. To obtain low fares for her clients, she
submitted fake military identification cards to the airlines. She was charged with the crime of
© 2022 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 6
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
identity theft, which requires the “use” of another’s identification. In a previous case, David
Miller, to obtain a loan, represented that certain investors approved of the loan when they did
not. Miller’s conviction for identity theft was overturned on the ground that he had not “used”
the investors’ identities—he had only said that they had done something when they had not.
In a second case, Kathy Medlock, the operator of an ambulance service, obtained payment for
transporting patients for whom there was no medical necessity to do so by forging a
physician’s signature. White’s actions most closely resemble Medlock’s forgery. White not
only told the airlines that her clients were members of the military—she created false
identification cards and sent them to the airlines.
In all of these cases, the defendants lied about their actions. Whether or not their conduct fell
within the meaning of a word within a statute, or matched the actions of a perpetrator in
another case, none of these parties can claim to have acted ethically. Honesty is a part of
ethical behavior in any set of circumstances, and none these defendants were truthful about
their actions.
In the actual case on which this problem is based, the court concluded that White’s actions
were most similar to Medlock’s. White was convicted of identity theft. On appeal, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
1. In the two cases cited by the court, were there any ethical differences in the actions of the
parties? Explain your answer.
Solution
No, in the two cases cited by the White court—and in the White case—there were no ethical
differences in the actions of the parties.
Almost any definition of ethics, and any set of ethical standards, includes honesty as a
component. In the White case, Sandra White lied to the airlines that her clients were members
of the military, and created false identification cards to obtain cheaper fares. In the first case
cited by the White court, David Miller, to obtain a loan, represented that certain investors
approved of the loan when they did not. In the second case cited by the White court, Kathy
Medlock, the operator of an ambulance service, obtained payment for transporting patients
for whom there was no medical necessity to do so by forging a physician’s signature.
In all of these cases, the defendants lied. Whether or not their conduct fell within the meaning
of a word within a statute, or matched the unlawful actions of each other, none of these
parties can claim to have acted ethically. Honesty is a part of ethical behavior in any set of
circumstances, and none these defendants were truthful.
Critical Thinking and Writing Assignments
1. Business Law Writing. John’s company is involved in a lawsuit with a customer, Beth. John
argues that for fifty years higher courts in that state have decided cases involving circumstances
similar to his case in a way that indicates he can expect a ruling in his company’s favor. Write at
least one paragraph discussing whether this is a valid argument. Write another paragraph
discussing whether the judge in this case must rule as those other judges did, and why. (See The
Common Law.)
Solution
© 2022 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 7
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
John’s argument is valid. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, judges are generally bound to follow
the precedents set in their jurisdictions by the judges who have decided similar cases. A judge
does not always have to rule as other judges have, however. A judge can depart from precedent.
One argument that a party might offer to counter an assertion of precedent is that the times have
changed—the social, economic, political, or other circumstances have changed—and thus it is
time to change the law.
2. Time-Limited Group Assignment—Court Opinions. Go to the section entitled Reading and
Understanding Case Law in the appendix at the end of this chapter, and read through the
subsection entitled “Decisions and Opinions.”
1. One group will explain the difference between a concurring opinion and a majority opinion.
Solution
A majority opinion is a written opinion outlining the views of the majority of the judges or
justices deciding a particular case. A concurring opinion is a written opinion by a judge or
justice who agrees with the conclusion reached by the majority of the court but not
necessarily with the legal reasoning that led the conclusion.
2. Another group will outline the difference between a concurring opinion and a dissenting
opinion.
Solution
A concurring opinion will voice alternative or additional reasons as to why the conclusion is
warranted or clarify certain legal points concerning the issue. A dissenting opinion is a
written opinion in which judges or justices who do not agree with the conclusion reached by
the majority of the court expound their views on the case.
The third group will explain why judges and justices write concurring and dissenting opinions,
given that these opinions will not affect the outcome of the case at hand, which has already
been decided by majority vote.
Solution
Obviously, a concurring or dissenting opinion will not affect the case involved—because it has
already been decided by majority vote. Nevertheless, such opinions often are used by another
court later to support its position on a similar issue.
Appendix Exhibit
1. For a federal district court to hear a case, the “amount in controversy” must be at least $75,000.
Jones paid $5,000 for the motor and $304 in freight charges. What other losses or injuries might
Jones claim in order to cross the “amount in controversy” threshold? Explain.
Solution
The amount in controversy in a dispute is measured by the value of the object of the litigation.
This is not necessarily the amount of money sought or the award obtained through a judgment—
it is the value of the consequences that may result from the litigation. It should be considered
from the perspective of the plaintiff, with a focus on the economic value of the rights the plaintiff
seeks to protect.
In the Adelman’s case, Jones could have sought the price of the nonconforming goods, the freight
charges, and other costs directly related to the alleged breach of contract—lost profits
© 2022 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 8
website, in whole or in part.
Text & Summarized Cases, 13th Edition Roger
LeRoy Miller
Notes
1- All Chapters are step by step.
2- We have shown you 10 pages.
3- The file contains all Appendix and Excel
sheet if it exists.
4- We have all what you need, we make
update at every time. There are many new
editions waiting you.
5- If you think you purchased the wrong file
You can contact us at every time, we can
replace it with true one.
Our email:
, Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
Solution and Answer Guide
Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
Table of Contents
Critical Thinking Questions in Features .................................................................................................................. 1
Managerial Strategy—Business Questions ................................................................................................ 1
Chapter Review ................................................................................................................................................................ 2
Practice and Review .................................................................................................................................. 2
Practice and Review: Debate This ............................................................................................................. 2
Issue Spotters ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Business Scenarios and Case Problems ..................................................................................................... 3
Critical Thinking and Writing Assignments ................................................................................................ 7
Appendix Exhibit ........................................................................................................................................ 8
Critical Thinking Questions in Features
Managerial Strategy—Business Questions
1. “When faced with a clearly erroneous precedent, my rule is simple,” writes Supreme Court Justice
Clarence Thomas. “We should not follow it.” How do these words offer a cautionary tale for
managers relying on stare decisis to make business decisions?
Solution
Simply put, the doctrine of stare decisis applies in all instances, except when it does not. As noted
in the text, a court is able to depart from precedent if it feels that legal, social, or technological
changes have rendered the previous decision untenable. In this case, just because the United
State Supreme Court believes, at present, that automobile salespeople are exempt from the
overtime rules of the FLSA, there is a possibility that the Court could reverse itself in the future. In
this context, managers need to be aware that (1) any decision they make based on a court
decision is subject to change, and (2) if they believe that a previous business law-related court
decision is flawed, they can challenge it in court.
2. Should Roberta consider paying her salespeople overtime even though it is not required by
federal law? Why or why not?
Solution
Just because Roberta is legally able to avoid paying the salespeople at her new used car
dealership overtime, should she? As with so many managerial decisions, the answer to this
question involves the tricky determination of costs and benefits. On the one hand, Roberta’s costs
will be lower if she does not have to pay overtime to the salespeople. On the other hand, the
salespeople may be more motivated if they feel they are being properly compensated for the
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
extra hours they spend on the lot. The extra motivation will likely lead to additional sales, which
very well may offset the overtime costs.
Chapter Review
Practice and Review
Suppose that the California legislature passes a law that severely restricts carbon dioxide emissions of
automobiles in that state. A group of automobile manufacturers files a suit against the state of
California to prevent enforcement of the law. The automakers claim that a federal law already sets fuel
economy standards nationwide and that these standards are essentially the same as carbon dioxide
emission standards. According to the automobile manufacturers, it is unfair to allow California to
impose more stringent regulations than those set by the federal law. Using the information presented
in the chapter, answer the following questions.
1. Who are the parties (the plaintiffs and the defendant) in this lawsuit?
Solution
In this situation, the automobile manufacturers are the plaintiffs, and the state of California is the
defendant.
2. Are the plaintiffs seeking a legal remedy or an equitable remedy? Why?
Solution
The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction, which is an equitable remedy, to prevent the state of
California from enforcing its statute restricting carbon dioxide emissions.
3. What is the primary source of the law that is at issue here?
Solution
This case involves a law passed by the California legislature and a federal statute, thus the primary
source of law is statutory law.
4. Read through the appendix that follows this chapter, and then answer the following question:
Where would you look to find the relevant California and federal laws?
Solution
Federal statutes are found in the United States Code, and California statutes are published in the
California Code. You would look in both of these sources to find the relevant state and federal
statutes.
Practice and Review: Debate This
1. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts are obligated to follow the precedents established in
their jurisdictions unless there is a compelling reason not to. Should U.S. courts continue to
adhere to this common law principle, given that our government now regulates so many areas by
statute?
Solution
Both England and the U.S. legal systems were constructed on the common law system. The
doctrine of stare decisis has always been a major part of this system—courts should follow
precedents when they are clearly established, excepted when compelling reasons dictate
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
otherwise. Even though more common law is being turned into statutory law, the doctrine of stare
decisis is still valid. After all, statutes often must to be interpreted by courts. What better basis for
judges to render their decisions than by basing them on precedents related to the subject at
hand?
In contrast, some students may argue that the doctrine of stare decisis is passé. There is certainly
less common law governing, say, environmental law than there was 100 years ago. Given that
federal and state governments increasingly are regulating more aspects of commercial
transactions between merchants and consumers, perhaps the courts should simply stick to
statutory language when disputes arise.
Issue Spotters
1. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides protection for the free exercise of religion.
A state legislature enacts a law that outlaws all religions that do not derive from the Judeo-
Christian tradition. Is this law valid within that state? Why or why not?
Solution
No. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and applies to all jurisdictions. A law in
violation of the Constitution (in this question, the First Amendment to the Constitution) will be
declared unconstitutional.
2. Apex Corporation learns that a federal administrative agency is considering a rule that will have a
negative impact on the firm’s ability to do business. Does the firm have any opportunity to
express its opinion about the pending rule? Explain.
Solution
Yes. Administrative rulemaking starts with the publication of a notice of the rulemaking in the
Federal Register. Among other details, this notice states where and when the proceedings, such as
a public hearing, will be held. Proponents and opponents can offer their comments and concerns
regarding the pending rule. After reviewing all the comments from the proceedings, the agency’s
decision makers consider what was presented and draft the final rule.
Business Scenarios and Case Problems
1. Binding versus Persuasive Authority. A county court in Illinois is deciding a case involving an
issue that has never been addressed before in that state’s courts. The Iowa Supreme Court,
however, recently decided a case involving a very similar fact pattern. Is the Illinois court obligated
to follow the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision on the issue? If the United States Supreme Court had
decided a similar case, would that decision be binding on the Illinois court? Explain. (See The
Common Law.)
Solution
A decision of a court is binding on all inferior courts. Because no state’s court is inferior to any
other state’s court, no state’s court is obligated to follow the decision of another state’s court on
an issue. The decision may be persuasive, however, depending on the nature of the case and the
particular judge hearing it. A decision of the United States Supreme Court on an issue is binding,
like the decision of any higher court, on all inferior courts. The United States Supreme Court is
the nation’s highest court, however, and thus, its decisions are binding on all courts, including
state courts.
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
2. Sources of Law. This chapter discussed a number of sources of American law. Which source of
law takes priority in the following situations, and why? (See Sources of American Law.)
1. A federal statute conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.
Solution
1. The U.S. Constitution—The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. A law in violation
of the Constitution, no matter what its source, will be declared unconstitutional and will not
be enforced.
2. A federal statute conflicts with a state constitutional provision.
Solution
2. The federal statute—Under the U.S. Constitution, when there is a conflict between a federal
law and a state law, the state law is rendered invalid.
3. A state statute conflicts with the common law of that state.
Solution
3. The state statute—State statutes are enacted by state legislatures. Areas not covered by state
statutory law are governed by state case law.
4. A state constitutional amendment conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.
Solution
4. The U.S. Constitution—State constitutions are supreme within their respective borders unless
they conflict with the U.S. Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.
3. Remedies. Arthur Rabe is suing Xavier Sanchez for breaching a contract in which Sanchez
promised to sell Rabe a Van Gogh painting for $150,000. (See The Common Law.)
1. In this lawsuit, who is the plaintiff, and who is the defendant?
Solution
1. In a suit by Arthur Rabe against Xavier Sanchez, Rabe is the plaintiff and Sanchez is the
defendant.
2. If Rabe wants Sanchez to perform the contract as promised, what remedy should Rabe seek?
Solution
2. Specific performance is the remedy that includes an order to a party to perform a contract as
promised.
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
3. Suppose that Rabe wants to cancel the contract because Sanchez fraudulently misrepresented
the painting as an original Van Gogh when in fact it is a copy. In this situation, what remedy
should Rabe seek?
Solution
3. Rescission is a remedy that includes an order to cancel a contract.
4. Will the remedy Rabe seeks in either situation be a remedy at law or a remedy in equity?
Solution
4. In both cases, these remedies are remedies in equity.
4. Philosophy of Law. After World War II ended in 1945, an international tribunal of judges
convened at Nuremberg, Germany. The judges convicted several Nazi war criminals of “crimes
against humanity.” Assuming that the Nazis who were convicted had not disobeyed any law of
their country and had merely been following their government’s (Hitler’s) orders, what law had
they violated? Explain. (See The Common Law.)
Solution
Crimes against humanity constituted, at the time of the Nuremberg trials, a new international
crime, consisting of “murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts
committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political,
racial or religious ground.” In response to the defendants’ assertion that they had only been
following orders, the Nuremberg judges explained in part that these were familiar crimes within
domestic jurisdictions and that thus the accused must have known, when they committed their
acts, that they would be considered criminal.
In terms of a philosophy of law, it might be said that these criminals violated “natural law.” The
oldest and one of the most significant schools of jurisprudence is the natural law school. Those
who adhere to the natural law school of thought believe that government and the legal system
should reflect universal moral and ethical principles that are inherent in human nature. Because
natural law is universal, it takes on a higher order than positive, or conventional, law. The natural
law tradition presupposes that the legitimacy of conventional, or positive, law derives from natural
law. Whenever it conflicts with natural law, conventional law loses its legitimacy. For example, a
precept of natural law may be that murder is wrong, which is a value reflected by specific laws
prohibiting murder. If a specific, written law requires murder, it conflicts with the natural law
precept, in which case individuals should disobey the written law and obey the natural law.
5. Spotlight on AOL—Common Law. AOL, LLC, mistakenly made public the personal information
of 650,000 of its members. The members filed a suit, alleging violations of California law. AOL
asked the court to dismiss the suit on the basis of a “forum-selection” clause in its member
agreement that designates Virginia courts as the place where member disputes will be tried.
Under a decision of the United States Supreme Court, a forum-selection clause is unenforceable
“if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy of the forum in which suit is brought.”
California has declared in other cases that the AOL clause contravenes a strong public policy. If
the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis, will it dismiss the suit? Explain. [Doe 1 v. AOL, LLC,
552 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2009)] (See The Common Law.)
Solution
© 2022 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: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
The doctrine of stare decisis is the process of deciding cases with reference to former decisions, or
precedents. Under this doctrine, judges are obligated to follow the precedents established within
their jurisdiction.
In this problem, the enforceability of a forum selection clause is at issue. There are two precedents
mentioned in the facts that the court can apply. The United States Supreme Court has held that a
forum selection clause is unenforceable “if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy
of the forum in which suit is brought.” And California has declared in other cases that the AOL
clause contravenes a strong public policy. If the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis, it will
allow the suit to move forward.
In the actual case on which this problem is based, the court determined that the clause is not
enforceable under those precedents.
6. Business Case Problem with Sample Answer— Reading Citations. Assume that you want to
read the entire court opinion in the case of Friends of Buckingham v. State Air Pollution Control
Board, 947 F.3d 68 (4th Cir. 2020).
Refer to the appendix to this chapter, and then explain specifically where you would find the
court’s opinion. (See Finding Case Law.)
—For a sample answer to Problem 1–6, go to Appendix E.
Solution
The court’s opinion in the case Friends of Buckingham v. State Air Pollution Control Board can be
found in volume 947 of the Federal Reporter, third series, on page 68. The Federal Reporter
contains the decisions of all the United States Courts of Appeals, including, as is the case here, the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Also, this case was decided (though not necessarily filed) in 2020.
7. A Question of Ethics—The Doctrine of Precedent. Sandra White operated a travel agency. To
obtain lower airline fares for her nonmilitary clients, she booked military-rate travel by forwarding
fake military identification cards to the airlines. The government charged White with identity theft,
which requires the “use” of another’s identification. The trial court had two cases that represented
precedents.
In the first case, David Miller obtained a loan to buy land by representing that certain investors
had approved the loan when, in fact, they had not. Miller’s conviction for identity theft was
overturned because he had merely said that the investors had done something when they had
not. According to the court, this was not the “use” of another’s identification.
In the second case, Kathy Medlock, an ambulance service operator, had transported patients for
whom there was no medical necessity to do so. To obtain payment, Medlock had forged a
physician’s signature. The court concluded that this was “use” of another person’s identity. [United
States v. White, 846 F.3d 170 (6th Cir. 2017)] (See Sources of American Law.)
1. Which precedent—the Miller case or the Medlock case—is similar to White’s situation, and
why?
Solution
In this problem, White operated a travel agency. To obtain low fares for her clients, she
submitted fake military identification cards to the airlines. She was charged with the crime of
© 2022 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 6
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
identity theft, which requires the “use” of another’s identification. In a previous case, David
Miller, to obtain a loan, represented that certain investors approved of the loan when they did
not. Miller’s conviction for identity theft was overturned on the ground that he had not “used”
the investors’ identities—he had only said that they had done something when they had not.
In a second case, Kathy Medlock, the operator of an ambulance service, obtained payment for
transporting patients for whom there was no medical necessity to do so by forging a
physician’s signature. White’s actions most closely resemble Medlock’s forgery. White not
only told the airlines that her clients were members of the military—she created false
identification cards and sent them to the airlines.
In all of these cases, the defendants lied about their actions. Whether or not their conduct fell
within the meaning of a word within a statute, or matched the actions of a perpetrator in
another case, none of these parties can claim to have acted ethically. Honesty is a part of
ethical behavior in any set of circumstances, and none these defendants were truthful about
their actions.
In the actual case on which this problem is based, the court concluded that White’s actions
were most similar to Medlock’s. White was convicted of identity theft. On appeal, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
1. In the two cases cited by the court, were there any ethical differences in the actions of the
parties? Explain your answer.
Solution
No, in the two cases cited by the White court—and in the White case—there were no ethical
differences in the actions of the parties.
Almost any definition of ethics, and any set of ethical standards, includes honesty as a
component. In the White case, Sandra White lied to the airlines that her clients were members
of the military, and created false identification cards to obtain cheaper fares. In the first case
cited by the White court, David Miller, to obtain a loan, represented that certain investors
approved of the loan when they did not. In the second case cited by the White court, Kathy
Medlock, the operator of an ambulance service, obtained payment for transporting patients
for whom there was no medical necessity to do so by forging a physician’s signature.
In all of these cases, the defendants lied. Whether or not their conduct fell within the meaning
of a word within a statute, or matched the unlawful actions of each other, none of these
parties can claim to have acted ethically. Honesty is a part of ethical behavior in any set of
circumstances, and none these defendants were truthful.
Critical Thinking and Writing Assignments
1. Business Law Writing. John’s company is involved in a lawsuit with a customer, Beth. John
argues that for fifty years higher courts in that state have decided cases involving circumstances
similar to his case in a way that indicates he can expect a ruling in his company’s favor. Write at
least one paragraph discussing whether this is a valid argument. Write another paragraph
discussing whether the judge in this case must rule as those other judges did, and why. (See The
Common Law.)
Solution
© 2022 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 7
website, in whole or in part.
, Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 13e, 9780357634943;
Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning
John’s argument is valid. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, judges are generally bound to follow
the precedents set in their jurisdictions by the judges who have decided similar cases. A judge
does not always have to rule as other judges have, however. A judge can depart from precedent.
One argument that a party might offer to counter an assertion of precedent is that the times have
changed—the social, economic, political, or other circumstances have changed—and thus it is
time to change the law.
2. Time-Limited Group Assignment—Court Opinions. Go to the section entitled Reading and
Understanding Case Law in the appendix at the end of this chapter, and read through the
subsection entitled “Decisions and Opinions.”
1. One group will explain the difference between a concurring opinion and a majority opinion.
Solution
A majority opinion is a written opinion outlining the views of the majority of the judges or
justices deciding a particular case. A concurring opinion is a written opinion by a judge or
justice who agrees with the conclusion reached by the majority of the court but not
necessarily with the legal reasoning that led the conclusion.
2. Another group will outline the difference between a concurring opinion and a dissenting
opinion.
Solution
A concurring opinion will voice alternative or additional reasons as to why the conclusion is
warranted or clarify certain legal points concerning the issue. A dissenting opinion is a
written opinion in which judges or justices who do not agree with the conclusion reached by
the majority of the court expound their views on the case.
The third group will explain why judges and justices write concurring and dissenting opinions,
given that these opinions will not affect the outcome of the case at hand, which has already
been decided by majority vote.
Solution
Obviously, a concurring or dissenting opinion will not affect the case involved—because it has
already been decided by majority vote. Nevertheless, such opinions often are used by another
court later to support its position on a similar issue.
Appendix Exhibit
1. For a federal district court to hear a case, the “amount in controversy” must be at least $75,000.
Jones paid $5,000 for the motor and $304 in freight charges. What other losses or injuries might
Jones claim in order to cross the “amount in controversy” threshold? Explain.
Solution
The amount in controversy in a dispute is measured by the value of the object of the litigation.
This is not necessarily the amount of money sought or the award obtained through a judgment—
it is the value of the consequences that may result from the litigation. It should be considered
from the perspective of the plaintiff, with a focus on the economic value of the rights the plaintiff
seeks to protect.
In the Adelman’s case, Jones could have sought the price of the nonconforming goods, the freight
charges, and other costs directly related to the alleged breach of contract—lost profits
© 2022 Cengage. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible 8
website, in whole or in part.
