2 case studies on Business Law knowledge
Case study 1
Before You Start
Review IRAC.
Read the chapters associated with this module.
Carefully review the instructions and information below.
Important Guidelines
Your score will be determined using the Critical Legal Thinking Case Study Rubric. Please read this rubric thoroughly before attempting this assignment.
Your score will be determined by the evaluation of your substantive content. Using IRAC to structure and develop your answer is crucial. Your analysis and solutions must be based on the principles of law, ethics, and business—not on your opinions.
Key facts are those facts that determine if the principles of law are met. You must demonstrate that you recognize the key facts in this case. Make sure you have identified those key facts and applied them in your IRAC.
The length of your response doesn’t directly impact your score, but you need to provide a sufficient length of an answer to address the fact pattern completely. Although there is no minimum or limit, however, most responses will be at least two to three substantial pages.
Frank is the receiving dock supervisor for Cabinet Co., a company that manufactures metal storage cabinets. His job is to supervise the inspection and stocking of components and materials used in the manufacture of the cabinets as they are delivered and to notify the accounting department so invoices can be timely paid. On June 1, the company received a shipment of casters used in the manufacture of rolling cabinets. This new shipment would not be needed for three weeks, as there were plenty of casters located on the assembly line. The storage facilities where the casters would normally be placed were under renovation, and there would be no space to store this latest shipment of casters until June 20. Frank decided to leave the unopened boxes of casters in a secure and covered corner of the receiving dock. He did, however, notify the accounting department that the casters had been received. The accounting department paid the $8,000.00 invoice in time to earn the discount if paid within ten days.
On June 20 Frank had his workers open the boxes of casters to inspect them and place them in the appropriate space in the storage facility. Upon inspection, it was determined that nearly all of the casters were defective and unusable. This caused the company to default on several contracts for rolling cabinets as it ran out of casters before it could secure replacements for the defective ones. Cabinet Co. was able to replace the casters at a 15% increase in cost.
Using IRAC discuss Cabinet Co.’s and its employees’ duties, obligations, and remedies with respect to the fact pattern.
Using IRAC your answer should include the pro and cons outlined in the reading material. You should also discuss the elements of the cause of action, defenses, and your ultimate conclusion based on the fact pattern.
Case study 2
Before You Start
Review IRAC.
Read the chapters associated with this module.
Carefully review the instructions and information below.
Important Guidelines
Your score will be determined using the Critical Legal Thinking Case Study Rubric. Please read this rubric thoroughly before attempting this assignment.
Your score will be determined by the evaluation of your substantive content. Using IRAC to structure and develop your answer is crucial. Your analysis and solutions must be based on the principles of law, ethics, and business—not on your opinions.
Key facts are those facts that determine if the principles of law are met. You must demonstrate that you recognize the key facts in this case. Make sure you have identified those key facts and applied them in your IRAC.
The length of your response doesn’t directly impact your score, but you need to provide a sufficient length of an answer to address the fact pattern completely. Although there is no minimum or limit, however, most responses will be at least two to three substantial pages.
Roger is a director of a major car manufacturer. This is one of the few remaining car companies yet to introduce a sport utility vehicle. Roger convinces the board to investigate forming a new division to design, build, and market a sport utility vehicle. Roger also convinces the board that the first sport utility vehicle that the division introduces should be the largest yet sold to the general public.
The board set up a committee to do some research, and this committee hired a marketing consulting firm. The committee and the consulting firm both had a few reservations about such a large vehicle, but the data showed that the market could most likely support it. After much discussion, the board of directors voted in favor of creating the new division and the huge sport utility vehicle as its first product. The vote was 9 to 6 in favor of the plan.
Shortly before this vehicle was introduced, there was a major oil supply disruption that caused the price of crude oil to nearly triple. Few purchasers were found for the huge new sport utility vehicle and the company lost considerable money. A shareholder filed suit against Roger claiming he violated his duty to the corporation by convincing the board to build and market the large SUV.
Using IRAC discuss the duties and defenses a director, here Roger, has to a lawsuit.
Using IRAC your answer should include the pro and cons outlined in the reading material. You should also discuss the elements of the cause of action, defenses, and your ultimate conclusion based on the fact pattern.