I decided to go with Example E regarding Brigitte Godot a representative with International Widgets. Bridgette promised PA Kettle a free trip to Paris. The legal issues in this case consist of Bridgette not following through with the verbal agreement she made with the owner of the company and the bases for getting the agreement signed within 24 hours would guarantee a free trip to Paris. Though the company took the discipline in their own hands by firing the sales representative responsible for the failure to deliver the promise that she made verbally. The plaintiff’s argument is that the company breached the contract. The plaintiff feels that they were mislead into buying the widgets because it would include a free trip to Paris. After many attempts to reach out to the sales person they succeeded into getting a free bus trip to Paris, Texas which isn’t where the sales representative advised the consumer but made them feel it would be Paris the country. So they were mislead into buying something under false pretenses. If the sales representative intended not to follow through with the original agreement then she should have allowed the customer to cancel the order to at least save the companies reputation from being ruined and considered to be a scam. The defendant’s argument is that the agreement was never placed in the written agreement. So the plaintiff didn’t take the time to read what they were going to be signing so basically agreeing to the terms of the contract and moving forward with buying the product with out any trip to guaranteed. With out the agreement in writing the company isn’t liable to pay for any trip that was verbally agreed upon and it could be hearsay which wouldn’t hold up in court because they plaintiff would have to have some form of proof to show that the agent agreed to such allegations. After doing the companies own investigation the learned that Mrs. Godot was deceiving potential clients in order to sale products but was giving the company a bad name by advising that the purchase would include a few trip. Another point in this case is that the verbal agreement was made to give a free trip to Paris, but which Paris was not specified so the customer was granted a trip to Paris but just not the Paris that they thought they would be going to. So though the agreement was misleading nothing in the contract that was signed stated anything about a free trip. So as a company they aren’t responsible for anything that isn’t stated in a signed contract. My decision as judge would be in rule of the Plaintiff because the representative of the International Widgets committed Intentional Misrepresentation better known as fraud. When Bigitte Godot promised P.A. the free trip if they signed the contract with in 24 hours she seemed to be looking to deceive the customer into buying the widgets under that false pretense. She already knew in her mind that she had no intent of fulfilling her end of the contract and paying for the free trip to Paris. She also knew that she could deceive the customer into believing that the trip would be to Paris, Italy but already knew about a different Paris that she’d send the customer to and knew that it would convince the customer to make a quick purchase. The facts state that even though the deal wasn’t on the written agreement that P.A. signed but the agent clearly committed fraud by making the customer believe that they would be issued a free trip and not follow through with the agreement. So she clearly was looking to get the money from the customer with out following through with the agreement. Even though the customer should have read the contract before signing the agent seemed to maliciously take the money from the customer and not worry about the deal she offered so that’s when it became fraud. I would grant the Plaintiff the free trip because they signed the contract and paid for the widgets with intent to take advantage of the free trip In my own opinion I believe that the legal rules that currently apply are fair and just I believe. Without these rules I believe that this customer would have got taken advantage of by the sales representative based on the scenario. With the agent clearly looking not to follow through with the agreement to get the money from the potential customer she clearly committed fraud because she used it as a form of deceit. This is why I believe it was a tort of Intentional Misrepresentation.