Explore BrainMass
Share

Explore BrainMass

    Legal issues

    This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

    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.

    Briefing Paper 1: Critical Legal Thinking

    Instructions:
    •Read International Shoe Company v. State of Washington, Cheeseman text page 51 .
    •Read International Shoe Company v. State of Washington, 326 U. S. 310.
    •Your business does not want any part of your company subject to service of process outside of your states boundaries. What effect will your state's long arm statute have on this case?.
    •Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss needs your clarification of your state's long arm statute and are only seeking your business opinion on the above questions at bullet point 3 above..

    Briefing Paper 2: Law Case with Answers

    Instructions:
    •Assume your business is threatened with a civil and criminal law suit over spoiled milk which made a customer sick..
    •What factors would your business leadership have to consider in whether or not to retain counsel? Discuss the pros and cons of each option considered..

    Briefing Paper 3: Critical Legal Thinking Case

    Instructions:
    •Go to www.statutes-of-limitations.com/state/.
    •Go to the State of Michigan and determine the statute of limitations on business fraud, a business tort and personal injury on your business property..
    •What defensive measures will your business leaders take against each of these liabilities?.
    •After what period of time will your business be safe for legal action?.
    •When will your leaders retain counsel?.
    •Provide the pros and cons for each response..

    Briefing Paper 4: Ethics Cases

    Instructions:
    •Read Section 3.7 Ethics - Cheeseman text page 60.
    •Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss is seeking your opinions on the 3 questions found at the end of Section..

    © BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 10, 2019, 8:14 am ad1c9bdddf
    https://brainmass.com/business/business-law/legal-issues-615336

    Attachments

    Solution Preview

    Here are the first three sections. Please review them and add to them to meet the class needs. I can only do the general facts and opinions about how to handle these. Let me know if the fourth one is for the National Enquirer case. Or the other partial one on the page, in which case I need the previous page as well. Then I will update with the information for that one as well.

    •Your business does not want any part of your company subject to service of process outside of your states boundaries. What effect will your state's long arm statute have on this case?.
    •Brief the facts of the case and assume your boss needs your clarification of your state's long arm statute and are only seeking your business opinion on the above questions at bullet point 3 above..
    The Florida "long arm" statute is very similar and works the same as the statute in the following case.
    In the case of International International Shoe v. State of Washington, the International International Shoe (International Shoe) was doing business in the state of Washington. The company is a Delaware company and has its main place of business in St. Louis, MO. The company had a sales representative working in Washington and the representative sold shoes both door to door and at temporary locations. The sales representative was paid on commission, based on the number of shoes sold. When the state decided to assess the International Shoe for unemployment taxes, it billed based on the employment of the representative. The International Shoe did not pay and the state then served a personal service (process server) on the representative of the company and mailed one to the company headquarters in St. Louis. International Shoe appeared before then argued that it did not do sufficient business in Washington to have to pay the tax in that state. The Office of Unemployment did not agree and ruled against International Shoe. The Appeals Tribunal, the Superior Court, and the Supreme Court of Washington all agreed and ruled against the company. The Supreme Court used the test of minimal contact within the state to find ...

    Solution Summary

    Legal reviews based on the provided cases.

    $2.19