6–1. Defamation. Richard is an employee of the Dun Construction Corp. While delivering materials to a construction site, he carelessly backs Dun’s truck into a passenger vehicle driven by Green. This is Richard’s second accident in six months. When the company owner, Dun, learns of this latest accident, a heated discussion ensues, and Dun fires Richard. Dun is so angry that he immediately writes a letter to the union of which Richard is a member and to all other construction companies in the community, stating that Richard is the “worst driver in the city” and that “anyone who hires him is asking for legal liability.” Richard files a suit against Dun, alleging libel on the basis of the statements made in the letters. Discuss the results.

6–6. Negligence. Ronald Rawls and Zabian Bailey were in an auto accident in Bridgeport, Connecticut. Bailey rear-ended Rawls at a stoplight. Evidence showed it was more likely than not that Bailey failed to apply his brakes in time to avoid the collision, failed to turn his vehicle to avoid the collision, failed to keep his vehicle under control, and was inattentive to his surroundings. Rawls led a suit in a Connecticut state court against his insurance company, Progressive Northern Insurance Co., to obtain benets under an underinsured motorist clause, alleging that Bailey had been negligent. Could Rawls collect? Discuss.7–2. Product Liability. Jason Clark, an experienced hunter, bought a paintball gun. Clark practiced with the gun and knew how to screw in the carbon dioxide cartridge, pump the gun, and use its safety and trigger. Although Clark was aware that he could purchase protective eyewear, he chose not to buy it. Clark had taken gun safety courses and understood that it was “common sense” not to shoot anyone in the face. Clark’s friend, Chris Wright, also owned a paintball gun and was similarly familiar with the gun’s use and its risks. Clark, Wright, and their friends played a game that involved shooting paintballs at cars whose occupants also had the guns. One night, while Clark and Wright were cruising with their guns, Wright shot at Clark’s car, but hit Clark in the eye. Clark filed a product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer of Wright’s paintball gun to recover for the injury. Clark claimed that the gun was defectively designed. During the trial, Wright testified that his gun “never malfunctioned.” In whose favor should the court rule? Why?7–4. Strict Product Liability. David Dobrovolny bought a new Ford F-350 pickup truck. A year later, the truck spontaneously caught re in Dobrovolny’s driveway. e truck was destroyed, but no other property was damaged, and no one was injured. Dobrovolny led a suit in a Nebraska state court against Ford Motor Co. on a theory of strict product liability to recover the cost of the truck. Nebraska limits the application of strict product liability to situations involving personal injuries. Is Dobrovolny’s claim likely to succeed? Why or why not? Is there another basis for liability on which he might recover? Explain.8–2. Patent Infringement. John and Andrew Doney invented a hard-bearing device for balancing rotors. Although they obtained a patent for their invention from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, it was never used as an automobile wheel balancer. Some time later, Exetron Corp. produced an automobile wheel balancer that used a hard-bearing device with a support plate similar to that of the Doneys’ device. Given that the Doneys had not used their device for automobile wheel balancing, does Exetron’s use of a similar device infringe on the Doneys’ patent? Why or why not?8–5. Copyright Infringement. SilverEdge Systems Software hired Catherine Conrad to perform a singing telegram. SilverEdge arranged for James Bendewald to record Conrad’s performance of her copyrighted song to post on its Web site. Conrad agreed to wear a microphone to assist in the recording, told Bendewald what to lm, and asked for an additional fee only if SilverEdge used the video for a commercial purpose. Later, the company chose to post a video of a dierent performer’s singing telegram instead. Conrad led a suit in a federal district court against SilverEdge and Bendewald for copyright infringement. Are the defendants liable? Explain.8–8. Copyright. Savant Homes, Inc., is a custom home designer and builder. Using what it called the “Anders Plan,” Savant built a model house in Windsor, Colorado. is was a ranch house with two bedrooms on one side and a master suite on the other, separated by a combined family room, dining room, and kitchen. Ron and Tammie Wagner toured the Savant house. e same month, the Wagners hired builder Douglas Collins and his rm, Douglas Consulting, LLC, to build a house for them in Windsor. After it was built, Savant led a suit in a federal district court against Collins for copyright infringement, alleging that the builder had copied the Anders Plan in the design and construction of the Wagner house. Collins showed that the Anders Plan consisted of standard elements and standard arrangements of elements. In these circumstances, has infringement occurred? Explain.24–4. Deceptive Advertising. Brian Cleary and Rita Burke led a suit against cigarette maker Philip Morris USA, Inc., seeking class-action status for a claim of deceptive advertising. Cleary and Burke claimed that “light” cigarettes, such as Marlboro Lights, were advertised as safer than regular cigarettes, even though the health eects are the same. ey contended that the tobacco companies concealed the true nature of light cigarettes. Philip Morris correctly claimed that it was authorized by the government to advertise cigarettes, including light cigarettes. Assuming that is true, should the plaintis still be able to bring a deceptive advertising claim against the tobacco company? Why or why not?25–3. Spotlight on the Grand Canyon—Environmental Impact Statement. e U.S. National Park Service (NPS) manages the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona under a management plan that is subject to periodic review. In 2006, after nine years of background work and the completion of a comprehensive environmental impact statement, the NPS issued a new management plan for the park. e plan allowed for the continued use of rafts on the Colorado River, which runs through the Grand Canyon. e number of rafts was limited, however. Several environmental groups criticized the plan because they felt that it still allowed too many rafts on the river. e groups asked a federal appellate court to overturn the plan, claiming that it violated the wilderness status of the national park. When can a federal court overturn a determination by an agency such as the NPS? Explain.26–1. Property Ownership. Madison owned a tract of land, but he was not sure that he had full title to the property. When Rafael expressed an interest in buying the land, Madison sold it to Rafael and executed a quitclaim deed. Rafael properly recorded the deed immediately. Several months later, Madison learned that he had had full title to the tract of land. He then sold the land to Linda by warranty deed. Linda knew of the earlier purchase by Rafael but took the deed anyway and later sued to have Rafael evicted from the land. Linda claimed that because she had a warranty deed, her title to the land was better than that conferred by Rafael’s quitclaim deed. Will Linda succeed in claiming title to the land? Explain.26–3. Eminent Domain. Some Catholic organizations propose to build a private independent middle school in a run-down neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. They asked the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia to acquire specific land for the project and sell it to them for a nominal price. The land included a house on North Eighth Street owned by Mary Smith, whose daughter Veronica lived there with her family. The Authority offered Smith $12,000 for the house and initiated a taking of the property. Smith filed a suit in state court against the Authority, admitting that the house was a “substandard structure in a blighted area,” but arguing that the taking was unconstitutional because its beneficiary was private. The Authority asserted that only the public purpose of the taking should be considered, not the status of the property’s developer. On what basis can a government entity use the power of eminent domain to take property? What are the limits to this power? How should the court rule? Why?26–5. Business Case Problem with Sample Answer— Adverse Possession. e McKeag family operated a marina on their lakefront property in Bolton, New York. For more than forty years, the McKeags used a section of property belonging to their neighbors, the Finleys, as a beach for the marina’s customers. e McKeags also stored a large oat on the beach during the winter months, built their own retaining wall, and planted bushes and owers there. e McKeags prevented others from using the property, including the Finleys. Nevertheless, the families always had a friendly relationship, and one of the Finleys gave the McKeags permission to continue using the beach in 1992. He also reminded them of his ownership several times, to which they said nothing. e McKeags also asked for permission to mow grass on the property and once apologized for leaving a jet ski there. Can the McKeags establish adverse possession over the statutory period of ten years? Why or why not?Cross, Frank B.; Miller, Roger LeRoy (2017-01-01). The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases (Page 567). South-Western College Pub. Kindle Edition.

RUNNING HEADER: Business law questions (UNIVERSITY)(SCHOOL)(DEPARTMENT) TITLE: BUSINESS LAW QUESTIONS (COURSE NAME)(COURSE CODE)(PROFESSOR)(DONE BY)(DATE) 1|Page RUNNING HEADER: Business law…