...defamation that happens when a person or company creates a fabricated, poor announcement about a third party, that assaults his or her personality. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter)-Stephanie Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have for Walter’s actions. Scenario: BUGusa, Inc., Plant Parking Lot-Vontice What defenses may be available to BUGusa, Inc.? Explain your answer. Scenario: BUGusa, Inc. (Randy and Brian)-Gwinnette What defenses may be available to BUGusa, Inc.? Explain your answer. Randy committed a tort of negligence in speeding and colliding with Brian’s vehicle. He did not intentionally hit him but his speeding contributed to the accident. Randy was negligent in his driving BUGusa, Inc.’s vehicle. BUGusa’s defense could be held under absolute privilege. This states that all federal officials have immunity in the Constitution via the “speech and debate clause” and BUGusa contracts with the federal government as well, making them a federal official as well. Scenario: BUGusa, Inc. (Sally)-Gwinnette Sally may have a successful case against BUGusa, Inc., for what torts? Explain your answer. This could be a case of negligence. BUGusa knew that the wires needed insulators and they failed to make sure that all defective merchandise was replaced to avoid injury. Very similar to when a car has a defect and is recalled. They should have made sure all product was recalled...
Words: 256 - Pages: 2
...Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. WIRETIME, Inc. places an ad in a magazine stating that BUGusa devices were low quality and did not work for more than a month. The tort is defamation. Defamation occurs when one party makes a false statement about another. A third party heard or read the statement must be about a particular party, and damages such as loss of business result of the statement. WIRETIME stated a false statement about the product only lasting a month and that they were low quality in order to make their product more desirable. It is libel defamation since it was in written in a magazine. It is specific since is targets BUGusa, Inc. product, and there is damages for loss of revenue from the statement. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. Janet has a two year contact with BUGusa, Inc. that if she gets fired or quits from BUGusa she is not allowed to work for a competitor. Janet informs WIRETIME that she has a contract and WIRETIME offers Janet 10% increase over her current pay and also gives her a $5000 signing bonus to come to work for them. The tort is contract interference which falls under business competition torts. This is a breach of contract since Janet has a contract with BUGusa, Inc. ...
Words: 1085 - Pages: 5
...Addressing International Issues John Hardnett LAW/421 August 19, 2014 Robert Phillips Some of the legal issues involved in resolving in legal issues international are changes in legislation, clash of interest, and ethical dilemmas. When business partners breach the contact and don’t have the best interest of the US Company in mind. If the foreign company is not making the quantity or the products to the patent specification. The practical considerations of taking legal action against foreign business partners based in other countries is when the contract that was written is not being following. If the foreign partner does breach the contract you want to try and resolve the problem without having to proceed with legal proceedings. The WTO requires that foreign and domestic companies be treated equally certain nations tend to protect their domestic companies through veiled regulations. The contract between both parties should be written to have the best interest of both parties. Some laws that protect rights in the US don’t apply in other countries. Without proceeding with legal ramifications the company the American company can claim compensation from their foreign partners. Factors that could affect Cadmex decision to grant sublicensing agreements are the companies may not make the product to the required quality standards or production requirements. When local customs and laws conflict with the customs and laws of an organization operating abroad which will prevail...
Words: 343 - Pages: 2
...University of Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. WIRETIME, Inc. (WIRETIME) has committed trade libel. WIRETIME’s advertisement satisfies the three conditions of trade libel as defined by our text (Melvin, 2011, p.212): 1. Clear and specific reference to the disparaged product. WIRETIME makes defamatory statements about a specific company [BUGusa (BUG)] as well as to the specific product that BUG manufactures (BUG’s electronic recording devices). 2. Disparaging statement made with either knowledge that the statement was false or reckless disregard for the truth. WIRETIME’s statement that BUG’s electronic recording devices are low quality and do not work reliably for longer than one month is reckless disregard for the truth. We have no proof referenced in this scenario ascertaining the truthfulness of WIRETIME’s statement, but we can demonstrate that they published this statement with malice, or reckless disregard for the truth, with the intent of making BUG’s customers believe that BUG manufactures a low quality, unreliable product, thus driving away BUG’s customers and influencing them to use WIRETIME’s product as an alternative. 3. Communicated to a third party. By advertising the disparaging statement, WIRETIME communicated to...
Words: 826 - Pages: 4
...Case Scenario: BUGusa, Inc. Learning Team D LAW/421 March 31, 2014 Tom Poulton The United States legal system provides certain rights and protections for intellectual property, which could be useful to BUGusa, Inc. The kind of property that results from mental labor are considered intellectual property. “Rights and protections for owners of intellectual property are based on federal patent, trademark and copyright laws and state trade secret laws” (AIPLA.org, Para. 1). Patents protect inventions of tangible things; copyrights protect forms of written and artistic expression; and trademarks protect a name or symbol that identifies the source of goods or services (AIPLA.org). WIRETIME, INC. Advertisement WIRETIME, Inc., has committed a tort which is “a civil wrong where one party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction causes a loss to be suffered by another party” (Melvin, S.P., 2011, p. 208). When WIRETIME placed an ad in a well-known industry magazine containing statements that BUGusa, Inc.’s electronic recording devices were low quality and did not work reliably for more than 1 month, they did commit a tort. This is considered defamation, but more specifically libel because they printed the ad, which states that the company has bad quality products when they have no facts to base that on. In Janet’s case, WIRETIME, Inc., committed a tort called Interference with Current Contractual Relationship, which means, “the third party intended...
Words: 725 - Pages: 3
...Scenario: BUGusa, Inc. (Sally) Sally may have a successful case against BUGusa, Inc., for what torts? Explain your answer. Issue Was Sally injured by her employer due to a Negligence Tort? Was Sally injured by BUGusa due to the defective product under the Strict Liability Tort? Rule Negligence Tort (NT) is an accidental (without willful intent) event that caused harm to another party. Strict Liability Tort (SLT) is where a tortfeasor may be held liable for an act regardless of intent or willfulness, applies primarily in cases of defective products and abnormally dangerous activities. Analysis NEGLIGENCE TORT Duty: As the employer, the police department owed a duty of care to Sally, its employee. Breach of Duty: By not maintaining safe equipment and identifying potential defectiveness, the police department failed to exercise reasonable care....
Words: 548 - Pages: 3
...University of Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. WIRETIME has carried out an intentional business associated tort generally known as Defamation. In this case all 4 factors of defamation are there. A defamatory declaration was made; it was displayed to a 3rd party, the declaration was very particular to one organization, and it put a negative frame of mind to BUGSusa Clients. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. n this case, WIRETIME has carried out a Tortuous Interference with Current Contractual Relationship Tort. WIRETIME had prompted Janet to break the present agreement with BUGSusa for their job. WIRETIME had unique understanding of and actually saw the agreement. They definitely interfered with the agreement and created losses because of training an alternative for Janet. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter) Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have for Walter’s actions. The kind of liability to BUGSusa in this situation is known as Scope of employment. In this case, the security guard carried out the tort of False Imprisonment on Steve. Though Steve wasn't behaving appropriately, neither was Walter because of the thin...
Words: 306 - Pages: 2
...University of Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. WIRETIME Inc has committed a Tort against BUGusa, assuming there is not data to support its claim. In the example given WIRETIME, Inc published in a magazine seemingly false claim about product quality and reliability. This advertising action qualifies as Defamation if BUGusa can prove loss of business and revenue over the comments. According to The Legal Environment of Business (pg.209) if the above conditions are true then the actions of WIRETIME, Inc meet the four elements in order to recover for a defamation action. Defamatory statement - This would be a statement from WIRETIME, Inc that BUGusa’s product is unreliable after one month (WIRETIME advertisement). Dissemination to a third party - This action is satisfied by WIRETIME, Inc. publishing their comments in an industry magazine. Specificity - If the claims are unfounded by WIRETIME, Inc, then this element is satisfied. Lastly if BUGusa can prove loss of business as a result of WIRETIME's advertising then the "Damages" element is satisfied. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. I believe that WIRETIME, Inc. has not committed a tort. Janet had a two-year contract with BUGusa, Inc. and took a contract...
Words: 771 - Pages: 4
...Bugusa, Inc. Worksheet LAW/421 Version 2 1 University of Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the BUGusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. In the case of WIRETIME, Inc., tort has been committed. Per the reading, “a tort is when one party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction triggered a loss to be grieved by another party” (Melvin, 2011). WIRETIME, Inc., made a defamatory statement about Bugusa, Inc.’s reputation. WIRETIME, Inc., also enlisted an ad in a well-known magazine that enclosed a statement alleging BUGusa for having bad merchandise. BUGusa doubtfully will undergo reputation or loss of clients due to the negative hoarding that WIRETIME, Inc., bashed. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter) Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have for Walter’s actions. In this case, the liability BUGusa, Inc., may encounter for Walter’s actions is that he committed a tort when locking Steve inside a soundproof room and threatened him with physical harm. Keeping Steve in a soundproof room can be defined as false imprisonment. False imprisonment prohibits wrongful restraining, confining or detaining a person without that person’s consent (Penal Code 236). Criminal threatening sometimes known...
Words: 1004 - Pages: 5
...Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter) Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have for Walter’s actions. BUGusa has liability for Walter’s actions when it comes to false imprisonment. Even though Steve was spying on BUGusa for Wiretime it does not give BUGusa the right to falsely imprison Steve. The parts of the tort that BUGusa are limited detention they are only allowed to hold Steve for a limited time and they held him for six hours. Walter also violated the coercion he forced Steve into a confession which is a violation of the tort. Scenario: BUGusa, Inc., Plant Parking Lot What defenses may be available to BUGusa, Inc.? Explain your answer. BUGusa may have a defense when it comes to the proximate tort. BUGusa had no idea that on that particular day and at that particular moment in the day the truck driver was going to get robbed. Also the company the truck driver worked for could have not sent him there now there has been an outbreak of robberies in that area. The driver also falls under the insurance of the company he works for not BUGusa so his company will...
Words: 298 - Pages: 2
...Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. After reviewing the four areas that must be met for a defamation tort, I feel that it does qualify for a tort. Defamatory statement – this was met. WIRETIME, Inc. had a statement published in a well-known magazine that can be interpreted as remarks that were meant to harm the reputation of the plaintiff. Dissemination to a third party – this was also met. The Restatements indicate this element requires the information to reach the eyes or ears of someone besides the tortfeasor and the victim. In this case, each person that purchased or even looked at the publication was subjected to the material. Specificity was met, the statement published in the magazine targeted BUGusa Inc. product. Damages can also be met if BUGusa, Inc. has lost a client or potential customer because of the information published. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. This situation qualifies for the Business Competition Tort. There was an employment contract (restrictive covenant) between Janet and BUGusa, Inc. that specified she would not go to work for a competing firm during the time period of her contract regardless of the reasons for her leaving her employment with BUGusa, Inc. WIRETIME had...
Words: 468 - Pages: 2
...University of Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. Wiretime has created the tort of trade libel. This tort is applicable due to the fact that Wiretime used BUGusa's name and product type. Next, they did it through a third party entity, the well known magazine. Finally, they showed reckless disregard for the truth in that there was no tests, research, or anything else provided to help support their claim. This defamation of character which has been set against BUGusa will help lower their reputation and even cost them customers. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. In the case of Janet, Wiretime has committed an tortious interference due to the fact that Janet showed them that she was under a non compete contract and they still offered her a 10% raise plus sign on bonus. The HR manager intentionally perused Janet knowing that it was illegal to do so for the next two years. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter) Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have for Walter’s actions. BUGusa is liable for Walter's actions due to the scope of employment. Walter held Steve against his will for more than six hours, creating a false imprisonment tort on Steve. Also...
Words: 572 - Pages: 3
...Phoenix Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. Wiretime has not committed any torts to my knowledge because Bugusa equipment was not working as it supposed to so that the company could use it as an option. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. The contractual relationship the company and Janet have that interfered with Wiretime. Nevertheless Wiretime can sue Bugusa because of them losing their employee Janet and any damages with company. Bugusa Inc has proof of the contract that was broken so Wiretime has interfered with the contract being broken Wiretime has losses to Bugusa so tort was done. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter) Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have for Walter’s actions. Bugusa liabilities they had with Walter actions are tort intentional of the negligence and employee of employees. Because of the actions Walters has made he must be responsible for his own action. False imprisonment was made when Steve was kept for hours and threats only made this case with Wiretime and Walter much worse. If Walter would have told the information to supervisor then the actions of Steve could have been prevented. Scenario: BUGusa, Inc., Plant Parking...
Words: 450 - Pages: 2
...Material BUGusa, Inc., Worksheet Use the scenarios in the Bugusa, Inc., link located on the student website to answer the following questions. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain. Yes, Disparagement such as belittling occurs where Wire Time makes false statements regarding the quality of goods or products electronic recording devices, that may cause loss of business to BUGusa Inc. False or fake negative reviews of a product may also constitute disparagement. BUGusa also have a Libel claim, which the harmful statement written in the magazine stating that the electronic recording devices were low quality and did not work for more than one month. This tort, formally known as defamation, is a statement communicated to a third party that harms a person business. There are two ways, which this can happen libel and slander. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain. Yes, Wire Time talked Janet into breaching the contract with BUGusa with cash 10% increase and a signing bonus of 5,000; Janet and Wire Time Interfered with BUGusa Inc. contract rights generally when a meddling third party convinces Janet to breach its contract with BUGusa. However, it can happen if a meddling party prevents a company from fulfilling its contractual obligations to BUGusa. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter) Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have...
Words: 382 - Pages: 2
...been an accident no matter if he would have yielded or not. Yet in turn there are a few defenses that would be available to BugUSA. Aaccording to (Melvin, 2011, p. 208), “negligence is an accidental (without willful intent) event that caused harm to another party.” BugUSA would be able to state that if Randy would have yielded properly at the intersection there would not have been an accident. It would come down to if BugUSA would be able to prove that Randy’s negligence was at fault for the accident. Scenario 6: This would as well be a hard case. Sally would be able to use the tort strict liability and possibly negligence. According to (Melvin, 2011, 208), strict liability is when the tortfeasor may be held liable for an act regardless of intent or willfulness, applies primarily in cases of defective products and abnormal dangerous activities. In this case, BugUSA was aware that an insulator could have prevented the short circuiting which lead to her injury. Yet BugUSA would be able to say that they are not the ones at fault because there is a newer version of the same product and that it is the police department that should be taking on the negligence and strict liability cases because they had not yet purchased the newer equipment or insulators for the older versions. In order for her to have a successful case, she would have to prove that BugUSA had known of the dangerous and did not offer a solution ot the police...
Words: 311 - Pages: 2
