We're Open
+44 7340 9595 39
+44 20 3239 6980

Briefing Paper: Critical Legal Thinking

Information



  • Post Date 2018-11-07T11:09:27+00:00
  • Post Category New Samples

No Plagiarism Guarantee - 100% Custom Written

Order Details

Briefing Paper: Critical Legal Thinking

Briefing Paper: Critical Legal Thinking

INSTRUCTIONS:

Unit III Case Study

 

Read the Call-of-the-Question carefully, and follow the instructions for each subject. Prepare four Briefing Papers using the APA Format for research papers, and upload them as one document for your response.

 

1. Critical Legal Thinking

 

Instructions:

 Read Wrench LLC v. Taco Bell Corporation, found in the Cheeseman text, pages 187-188.

 Respond to the three Case Questions found in the Cheeseman text, page 188.

 Assume your readers know the facts of the case and are only seeking your opinions as articulated in the Critical Legal Thinking, Ethics, and Contemporary Business questions. Argue both sides of all issues.

 

2. Law Case with Answers

 

Instructions:

 Read California and Hawaiian Sugar Company v. Sun Ship, Inc. found in the Cheeseman text, pages 222-223.

 Assume your readers know the facts of the case and are only seeking your opinions on whether the use of liquidated damage clauses in contracts is good or bad for your business by giving examples of when the clauses should and should not be used.

 Provide convincing arguments for both sides of this issue.

 

3. Critical Legal Thinking Cases

 

Instructions:

 Read Sections 11.1 Cybersquatting (pp. 240-241); 9.2 Agreement (p. 202); 10.3 Force Majeure Clause (p. 224); and 11.8 E-License (p. 242).

 Check the decisions of the highest appellate courts, if a case is cited, for each fact pattern.

 Assume your readers know the facts of each scenario and are seeking your opinions on whether each of the four subjects affect business in the United States, and if so, provide the worst and best case scenarios.

BBA 3210, Business Law 3

 

CONTENT:
Briefing PaperStudent:Professor:Course title:Date:Briefing PaperCritical Legal ThinkingThe doctrine of implied-in-fact contract is basically a contract where an agreement between the entities involved has been inferred from their conduct. This doctrine provides that three elements have to be established which include: (i) the plaintiff offered services/property to the defendant gratuitously; (ii) plaintiff expects payment for those services/property provided; and (iii) the defendant had an opportunity to decline but did not do so. Both Taco Bell and Chiat/Day did not act in ethical manner since their idea was not original; they stole it from Wrench LLC. The purpose of recognizing implied-in-fact contract is to avoid an unfair result; to prevent one party from refusing to pay for services or property that the party tacitly accepted at a time when it was possible for that party to reject it (Kinsey, 2011). There was an implied-in-fact contract in this case since Taco Bell tacitly accepted a benefit – an idea presented by Rinks and Shields &nda...

Price: £ 99

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions