Business Law Case Studies – Flashcards

Facts: 2 companies have a business relationship in 2 different states, NC and NJ Issue: Jurisdiction Minimum Contacts test: 1. quantity of contacts 2.nature and quality of 3. source, connection and and cause of action 4. the interest of the state 5. convenience to the parties Decision: Ruled in favor of plaintiff, NC has jurisdiction

Facts: NCR is suing KAL for copyright infringement. a contract held between the two parties had an arbitration clause saying all disputes of the contract will be decided by arbitration. KAL wants the court to approve arbitration Issue: whether or not a Arbitration should be forced Decision: Arbitration is affirmed because when there is controversy over a arbitration clause the courts as a rule should rule in favor of arbitration.

Facts: Fog Cutter is publicly traded company on NASDAQ and was delisted by NASD for violating NASD laws. There owner and majority owner changed the terms of his employment contract prior to his incarceration. This was done to protect the company from incurring extra expenses that it could not afford. These actions violated NASD rules. Issue: Fog Cutter Claimed that it was acting in the interest of their shareholders. NASD did not believe this to be the case. Decision: The court ruled in Favor of SEC because by Law the SEC has discretion to decide if a company is acting in the best interest of the stockholders and whether it is hurting the integrity of the NASDAQ.

Facts: Palsfrag was waiting for a train at a station when she was injured because a man who rushing to get on a train was shoved on it in an effort to help him. The man was carrying explosives that fell and went off causing debris to fall on Palsfrag. She sued for damages on the basis of negligent conduct by the railroad guards and won. The Railroad appealed. Issue: A victim must show that the negligent party must show that the most cautious mind could have thought that the parcel wrapped in paper could have contained explosives. Decision: The court ruled in favor of the railroad because a reasonable person could not had foreseen the results of the actions

Facts: At a golf scramble Cassie Pfenning was injured by a golf ball hit in the tournament. She sued the bar putting on the scramble for being negligent in providing for her safety. She claimed that she did not know the dangers involved with riding a golf cart around a golf course and that she was not adequately warned. The court granted Lineman a summary judgment and Pfenning appealed. Issue: Did they have a duty to prevent her from an injury Decision: The court affirmed the original decision. In sports, there is no duty from one person to another to prevent injury as a result of the sport.

Facts: Whitney Harper was using a file sharing application to download music copyrighted by the Maverick Records. The record company sued for copyright infringement and Harper claimed that her acts were innocent and that her liability should be reduced. the court ruled in favor of both parties, awarding the record company damages but not to the maximum amount allowed. They Both Appealed. Issue: Whether or not she was innocent of knowing that it was copyright infringement Decision: The court rule in Favor of Maverick because it was found that the warning labels on upload music is enough notice that file sharing is illegal.

Facts: Sisuphan, the director of finance at a dealership stole money from a transaction with the intent to bring a co-workers prior bad work performance to light. He intended to put the money back after the fact. He eventually returned the money and the dealership filed a felony charge of embezzlement against Sisuphan in which he was found guilty. He appealed. Issue: issue here is whether or not he had his intent for the use of the money would constitute embezzlement Decision: The court upheld the conviction because he intended to use the money for a purpose outside the scope of his responsibility to his company. You do not have to spend the money for fraudulent intent to be in place.

Supreme Court held that criminal suspects must be informed of their right to consult with an attorney and of their right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police.

Facts: Teleflex sued KSR for patent infringement in the production of Adjustable Pedal Assembly With Electronic Throttle Control. KSR countered that the claim was invalid because the subject matter was obvious and that the TSM test was not applied correctly. The courts ruled in favor of Teleflex and KSR appealed. Issue: Does the TSM test apply. If a technique has been used to improve one device and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his/hers skills. Decision: The court ruled in favor of KSR and found that a person of ordinary skill could have figured it out.

Facts: Kevin T. Singer, an inmate in a correctional facility was obsessed with the game, Dungeons and Dragons. Prison officials received info that Singer was recruiting fellow inmates to create a D&D gang. All of Singer's D items were confiscated and Singer filed a lawsuit in federal district court against the prison, stating that they violated his freedom of speech and due process rights. Singer also included a large quantum of affidavit testimonies from his fellow inmates saying that their D activities were not gang related. Decision: District court found in favor of the prison and Singer appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals.