BUL 4310 COMPLETE EXAM 1 The Legal Environment of Business NEW VERSION UPDATE
2025|026 University of Florida
Read
LSB Part 1:
LSB Part 1, pgs. 1-158 - LSB 2025 Part 1 for students.pdf
LSB Front Page and Table of Contents - LSB Table of Contents 2025-1.pdf
LSB Index (for the entire text) - LSB 2025 -Index to-Emerson-
LawSocietyandBusiness-2025 (pp 539-568)-1.pdf
Barron's:
Ch. 1 (except for pp. 13-15 & 16-17 on attorneys), and Chs. 14-17;
Ch. 2, pgs. 25-34 & 36-47 (all but First Amendment and Eminent Domain, covered for
test 2)
Ch. 3, Chapter 3’s pp. 57-65 & 67 (on some litigation concepts) and pp. 85-87 (Inquis.
Approach through case citation)
Ch. 27, pgs. 638-639 (on Independent Contractors and Statutory Employees)
Ch. 28, pg. 645-646 (Common Law, Civil Law, and Culture)
TOPICS AND SOURCES FOR BUL 4310’s FIRST TEST (scheduled for Monday,
September 29, 2025)
© Robert Emerson, 2025
Each Multiple-Choice question has five answers and is worth 2.5 points.
40 multiple-choice questions = 100 total points.
The Pages for Test One Readings and Lectures are outlined on approx. pages 8-10 of the
Syllabus.
Lectures coverage for Test One – through all classes to date: Class Lectures (CL) 1 to
21E
and there are three Topical Talks (TT) 1-1 to 1-3.
Again, my Review Session is the second class (21E), which was recorded today
(Thursday, September 25.
TOPIC HEADINGS (in order of class coverage) Number of Multiple-Choice Questions
Intro to Law through Classifications of Law (LSB 1-59; Barron’s Chapter 2 &
pp. 3-13, 17-24, 72-73, 86-87; CL 1 – CL-10, and 1st TT) 15
Theories of Law & Legal Systems (LSB 60-85; Barron’s pp. 85-86; CL 11 –
,CL-16)
Agency (LSB 85-112; Barron’s Ch. 14; CL-17 to first third of CL-20 , 14A, 14B,
15, 16 & first part of 17)
Establishing a Business (LSB 112-158; Barron’s chapters 15-17; last fifty
minutes of CL-20 thru CL 21D (the 1 st class recorded on Sept. 18), and 2 TT
on Corporations)
8
6.5
10.5
TOTAL 40
SOURCES
Hypothetical Situations
Barron’s
LSB (Law, Society & Business text)
Multiple-Choice Qs
35
33
38
Supp. Info. Text, Pt. One – on website 3
“Live” Lectures & Topical Lectures 37
Real Cases or Persons 5
International/Comparative Law 6
NOTE: The sources total is much more than the total number of questions because most questions fall
under more than one category.
Good luck on the test!
Your prof, Robert Emerson
1
Choose the true statement:
- If Alice wants to start a company in order to sell photographic equipment, Alyssa can choose to form a sole proprietorship and thus have
exclusive control over any of the “remote investors” in Alice’s business.
,- Compared to most other countries, including almost all Civil Law countries, China’s franchising laws are in effect the opposite of the flexible
laws for agency relationships and partnerships found in the United States.
- Shareholders rarely, if ever, have any significant managerial powers in their roles as shareholders.
- If a shareholder loses a derivative action against a corporation, that shareholder must sell his/her shares in the corporation.
- Corporate profits are only taxed if they are distributed to the shareholders.
Answer choice Shareholders rarely, if ever, have any significant managerial
powers in their roles as shareholders is true. Shareholders have no such duties.
LSB 148; Barron’s pages 386-387.
If a shareholder loses a derivative action against a corporation, that shareholder
must sell his/her shares in the corporation is false; Lectures; LSB 147-148;
Barron’s page 392-393. A major risk is that if a judge throws the suit out, the
suing shareholder must pay the other side’s lawsuit costs (most significant of all
being the attorney fees).
Compared to most other countries, including almost all Civil Law countries,
China’s franchising laws are in effect the opposite of the flexible laws for agency
relationships and partnerships found in the United States is false; This was
discussed in the example with a comparison of franchising law in China, Mexico,
and Morocco, and in turn comparing each to U.S. laws. However, the law is
generally flexible.”). China’s laws have followed much of the flexible laws
allowing for franchise contracting in many ways that the laws in the United
States do.
If Alice wants to start a company in order to sell photographic equipment, Alice
can choose to form a sole proprietorship and thus have exclusive control over
any of the “remote investors” in Alice’s business. is false; The nature of a sole
proprietorship is one investor. LSB 113.
Corporate profits are only taxed if they are distributed to the shareholders is
false; Corporations are legal “persons” and can be taxed on their income as
individuals are. Whether and how much corporations are taxed can be a highly
complex matter, and simply to say that – in effect - corporate profits will not be
taxed unless distributed to shareholders, is erroneous. LSB 130-131; Barron’s
page 359.
2
, Simon decides to start a business offering psychic consulting services (“Florida Visionary
Consulting”). Simon goes to Gavin, who was working at a pharmaceutical sales company
(“PureHealth Pharma Co.”). Simon hires Gavin to assist Simon as a key employee at
Florida Visionary Consulting. Gavin thus quits his job at PureHealth Pharma Co.. While
cleaning out his desk at PureHealth Pharma Co., Gavin overhears his former coworker
discussing the idea of hiring a private investigator to help her handle a personal issue.
Gavin tells the coworker that he can help her by offering his consulting services, and the
two form a contract where Gavin agrees to locate someone for the coworker. Gavin
eventually forgets he made the agreement with his coworker, and never locates the
person he agreed to locate. The coworker decides to sue for breach of contract. Under
which scenario would Gavin NOT be held liable?
- Gavin failed to tell the coworker that he works for Florida Visionary Consulting, and the coworker believed that Gavin was acting on his own
behalf.
- Gavin told the coworker before forming the contract that he worked for Florida Visionary Consulting, and Simon explicitly told Gavin that he
was allowed to form contracts on behalf of Florida Visionary Consulting.
- Gavin told the coworker that he was acting on behalf of his own new consulting company, but he did not tell the coworker the company’s
name nor did he mention Simon or Florida Visionary Consulting
- Gavin did not tell the coworker that he works for Florida Visionary Consulting, but the coworker saw a newspaper advertisement for Florida
Visionary Consulting that had both Simon and Gavin in the image.
- Gavin will be held liable regardless of whether the coworker knew that Gavin worked for Florida Visionary Consulting, because it was within
Gavin’s implied authority to make a contract on behalf of Florida Visionary Consulting.
Answer: "Gavin told the coworker before forming the contract that he worked
for Florida Visionary Consulting, and Simon explicitly told Gavin that he was
allowed to form contracts on behalf of Florida Visionary Consulting." (LSB 99-
100). This is the correct answer because the fact that Gavin told the coworker
about working for Florida Visionary Consulting makes Gavin a disclosed agent,
and disclosed agents are not held liable for breach of contract.
"Gavin failed to tell the coworker that he works for Florida Visionary Consulting,
and the coworker believed that Gavin was acting on his own behalf." is incorrect
because Gavin did not tell the coworker about Simon nor did he mention that he
worked for anyone else, meaning Simon would be an undisclosed principal and
Gavin would be an undisclosed agent. The coworker has the right to remedies
against the person she made the contract with (Gavin).
2025|026 University of Florida
Read
LSB Part 1:
LSB Part 1, pgs. 1-158 - LSB 2025 Part 1 for students.pdf
LSB Front Page and Table of Contents - LSB Table of Contents 2025-1.pdf
LSB Index (for the entire text) - LSB 2025 -Index to-Emerson-
LawSocietyandBusiness-2025 (pp 539-568)-1.pdf
Barron's:
Ch. 1 (except for pp. 13-15 & 16-17 on attorneys), and Chs. 14-17;
Ch. 2, pgs. 25-34 & 36-47 (all but First Amendment and Eminent Domain, covered for
test 2)
Ch. 3, Chapter 3’s pp. 57-65 & 67 (on some litigation concepts) and pp. 85-87 (Inquis.
Approach through case citation)
Ch. 27, pgs. 638-639 (on Independent Contractors and Statutory Employees)
Ch. 28, pg. 645-646 (Common Law, Civil Law, and Culture)
TOPICS AND SOURCES FOR BUL 4310’s FIRST TEST (scheduled for Monday,
September 29, 2025)
© Robert Emerson, 2025
Each Multiple-Choice question has five answers and is worth 2.5 points.
40 multiple-choice questions = 100 total points.
The Pages for Test One Readings and Lectures are outlined on approx. pages 8-10 of the
Syllabus.
Lectures coverage for Test One – through all classes to date: Class Lectures (CL) 1 to
21E
and there are three Topical Talks (TT) 1-1 to 1-3.
Again, my Review Session is the second class (21E), which was recorded today
(Thursday, September 25.
TOPIC HEADINGS (in order of class coverage) Number of Multiple-Choice Questions
Intro to Law through Classifications of Law (LSB 1-59; Barron’s Chapter 2 &
pp. 3-13, 17-24, 72-73, 86-87; CL 1 – CL-10, and 1st TT) 15
Theories of Law & Legal Systems (LSB 60-85; Barron’s pp. 85-86; CL 11 –
,CL-16)
Agency (LSB 85-112; Barron’s Ch. 14; CL-17 to first third of CL-20 , 14A, 14B,
15, 16 & first part of 17)
Establishing a Business (LSB 112-158; Barron’s chapters 15-17; last fifty
minutes of CL-20 thru CL 21D (the 1 st class recorded on Sept. 18), and 2 TT
on Corporations)
8
6.5
10.5
TOTAL 40
SOURCES
Hypothetical Situations
Barron’s
LSB (Law, Society & Business text)
Multiple-Choice Qs
35
33
38
Supp. Info. Text, Pt. One – on website 3
“Live” Lectures & Topical Lectures 37
Real Cases or Persons 5
International/Comparative Law 6
NOTE: The sources total is much more than the total number of questions because most questions fall
under more than one category.
Good luck on the test!
Your prof, Robert Emerson
1
Choose the true statement:
- If Alice wants to start a company in order to sell photographic equipment, Alyssa can choose to form a sole proprietorship and thus have
exclusive control over any of the “remote investors” in Alice’s business.
,- Compared to most other countries, including almost all Civil Law countries, China’s franchising laws are in effect the opposite of the flexible
laws for agency relationships and partnerships found in the United States.
- Shareholders rarely, if ever, have any significant managerial powers in their roles as shareholders.
- If a shareholder loses a derivative action against a corporation, that shareholder must sell his/her shares in the corporation.
- Corporate profits are only taxed if they are distributed to the shareholders.
Answer choice Shareholders rarely, if ever, have any significant managerial
powers in their roles as shareholders is true. Shareholders have no such duties.
LSB 148; Barron’s pages 386-387.
If a shareholder loses a derivative action against a corporation, that shareholder
must sell his/her shares in the corporation is false; Lectures; LSB 147-148;
Barron’s page 392-393. A major risk is that if a judge throws the suit out, the
suing shareholder must pay the other side’s lawsuit costs (most significant of all
being the attorney fees).
Compared to most other countries, including almost all Civil Law countries,
China’s franchising laws are in effect the opposite of the flexible laws for agency
relationships and partnerships found in the United States is false; This was
discussed in the example with a comparison of franchising law in China, Mexico,
and Morocco, and in turn comparing each to U.S. laws. However, the law is
generally flexible.”). China’s laws have followed much of the flexible laws
allowing for franchise contracting in many ways that the laws in the United
States do.
If Alice wants to start a company in order to sell photographic equipment, Alice
can choose to form a sole proprietorship and thus have exclusive control over
any of the “remote investors” in Alice’s business. is false; The nature of a sole
proprietorship is one investor. LSB 113.
Corporate profits are only taxed if they are distributed to the shareholders is
false; Corporations are legal “persons” and can be taxed on their income as
individuals are. Whether and how much corporations are taxed can be a highly
complex matter, and simply to say that – in effect - corporate profits will not be
taxed unless distributed to shareholders, is erroneous. LSB 130-131; Barron’s
page 359.
2
, Simon decides to start a business offering psychic consulting services (“Florida Visionary
Consulting”). Simon goes to Gavin, who was working at a pharmaceutical sales company
(“PureHealth Pharma Co.”). Simon hires Gavin to assist Simon as a key employee at
Florida Visionary Consulting. Gavin thus quits his job at PureHealth Pharma Co.. While
cleaning out his desk at PureHealth Pharma Co., Gavin overhears his former coworker
discussing the idea of hiring a private investigator to help her handle a personal issue.
Gavin tells the coworker that he can help her by offering his consulting services, and the
two form a contract where Gavin agrees to locate someone for the coworker. Gavin
eventually forgets he made the agreement with his coworker, and never locates the
person he agreed to locate. The coworker decides to sue for breach of contract. Under
which scenario would Gavin NOT be held liable?
- Gavin failed to tell the coworker that he works for Florida Visionary Consulting, and the coworker believed that Gavin was acting on his own
behalf.
- Gavin told the coworker before forming the contract that he worked for Florida Visionary Consulting, and Simon explicitly told Gavin that he
was allowed to form contracts on behalf of Florida Visionary Consulting.
- Gavin told the coworker that he was acting on behalf of his own new consulting company, but he did not tell the coworker the company’s
name nor did he mention Simon or Florida Visionary Consulting
- Gavin did not tell the coworker that he works for Florida Visionary Consulting, but the coworker saw a newspaper advertisement for Florida
Visionary Consulting that had both Simon and Gavin in the image.
- Gavin will be held liable regardless of whether the coworker knew that Gavin worked for Florida Visionary Consulting, because it was within
Gavin’s implied authority to make a contract on behalf of Florida Visionary Consulting.
Answer: "Gavin told the coworker before forming the contract that he worked
for Florida Visionary Consulting, and Simon explicitly told Gavin that he was
allowed to form contracts on behalf of Florida Visionary Consulting." (LSB 99-
100). This is the correct answer because the fact that Gavin told the coworker
about working for Florida Visionary Consulting makes Gavin a disclosed agent,
and disclosed agents are not held liable for breach of contract.
"Gavin failed to tell the coworker that he works for Florida Visionary Consulting,
and the coworker believed that Gavin was acting on his own behalf." is incorrect
because Gavin did not tell the coworker about Simon nor did he mention that he
worked for anyone else, meaning Simon would be an undisclosed principal and
Gavin would be an undisclosed agent. The coworker has the right to remedies
against the person she made the contract with (Gavin).
