MGMT 520 Midterm Exam – Perfect Answer
MGMT 520 Week 5 Midterm Exam
1. Question : TCO B. The “public comment” period closes on an OSHA proposed regulation, and your business had filed a public comment against the proposed regulation explaining that the regulation would not fix the problem that OSHA was trying to remedy, that the regulation would cost more than the problem itself, and that the regulation was a tax, not a safety change. List two arguments available to your company that may succeed in overturning the regulation.
2. Question : TCO F. Target sells bags that appear to be Prada, Gucci, and Coach handbags but are priced much lower. The brand labels on the bags say “Pardna,” “Guchy,” and “Coaching.” The prices are about 65% less than the typical brand-name bags. If the owners of the Prada, Coach, and Gucci names sue Target for palming off or counterfeiting, what would they need to prove to try to win? Do you think they would win? (short answer)
3. Question : (TCO C)Will E. Chancit, a 36-year-old attorney, was killed when his Ford Fairlane collided with some metal fence on the Harbor Freeway in Los Angeles. He was traveling at a speed between 50 and 70 mph. What happened was this: A city of Los Angeles construction crew had placed a “left lane closed ahead” sign with a “60 mph” speed limit sign under it. (The usual speed limit in that area was 70 mph.) However, the actual closed lane was the right lane. Speculation is that Will noticed at the last minute that he was in the wrong lane and over corrected, and that’s how he slid off the road and hit the fence.
After the collision, the car spun and the driver’s door flew open. Chancit was ejected from the car and sustained fatal head injuries. Had the door stayed closed, his injuries would have been relatively minor. Chancit was not wearing his seat belt, and his wife claims he had been up all night the night before after getting food poisoning at the local Chi-Chi’s.
I. Discuss the negligence or other theory for recovery in the suit Chancit’s widow has brought against Ford Motor Company, the makers of the Ford Fairlane.
II. Discuss all defenses Ford Motor Company might have.
III. Discuss any liability the City of Los Angeles may have.
IV. Discuss any liability Chi-Chi’s may have
4. Question : TCO D: Barney and his 16-year-old son BamBam are riding in Fred’s car. Fred had taken some prescription medication that morning that stated on the bottle, “Warning, may cause drowsiness.” The truck in front of them suffers a blow-out, and swerves uncontrollably. The tire remnants fly into the road, Fred swerves and hits a car to his left. He avoids hitting the truck with the blow-out but suffers damage to the left side of his car. BamBam hits his head on the side of the car, getting a concussion and permanently losing the sight in his right eye. Fred has state law required auto insurance with the minimum policy limits.
Fred’s wife, Wilma, immediately calls Betty, BamBam’s mom, and apologizes when she finds out about BamBam losing his eye. Wilma says to Betty, “Please don’t worry. We will pay for anything the insurance doesn’t cover, including the loss of BamBam’s sight and anything else he needs to recover and live a normal life.” Betty sobs and says, “You are too good to us. We can’t accept that.” Wilma says, “Of course you can.” Betty cries harder and says, “Thank you so much but (unintelligible)” and hangs up.
Fred and Wilma own a house worth $450,000, a car worth $20,000, a full-size T. rex skeleton for which a museum has offered $200,000 in the past, and some stocks and bonds worth $700,000.
A lawsuit ensues and a judgment against Fred and for BamBam is entered for $300,000. The insurance company paid their cap of $250,000, leaving $50,000 remaining due. Fred and Wilma immediately pay BamBam $50,000. Further, Wilma buys a designer eye-patch for BamBam made specifically by Calvin Klein with a picture of Fred and Wilma’s daughter, Pebbles, on it. Wilma hugs BamBam when she brings over his new eye patch and says, “Anything. Anything you need. We will take care of it for you.” Fred rolls his eyes at Barney, and Barney sighs and shakes his head. Betty and Wilma both cry at how adorable BamBam looks with his new eye patch. Barney buys BamBam a new car, specially designed for people with one eye. Wilma finds out and calls Betty, asking how much the car was. Betty says they are making payments on the car of $450/month for the next 4 years. Wilma writes Betty a check for $450, and sends her one every month for the next 8 months.
Eight months after the judgment was rendered, BamBam is discovered to have more damage to his head than originally thought. He loses sight in his other eye and now is totally blind. BamBam’s parents sue Fred and Wilma again for personal injury, but the case is thrown out as the first case already decided the injury case. Fred refuses to pay more to BamBam, and he takes the checkbook away from Wilma when he discovers she’s been making BamBam’s car payments. The two families stop speaking to each other. BamBam throws away his now useless eyepatch and becomes despondent. His dreams of being a drag racer seem to be over. BamBam’s attorney refiles the case, this time on grounds that Wilma’s statement to Betty was a binding contract that requires that Wilma pay any remaining damages to BamBam, for the remainder of his life.
Was Wilma’s statement a binding contract? Using the law of contracts, explain why or why not. Does BamBam’s age have anything to do with your answer? Can Fred be bound by the potential contract Wilma may have entered into? Use the law of agency to explain your answer to that question. Did Wilma’s purchase of the eye-patch give BamBam a greater leg to stand on in court? What about the car payments she made? Explain fully your answer to these questions.
5. Question : TCO I. Marianne Jennings wrote an article, “Why an International Code of Ethics would be good,” which was assigned to be read at the beginning of the course. As you have worked throughout this session, you should have considered this article and how it may or may not have impacted different situations in the world economic/business/legal/political environments. The essay you will write on the next question should show that you have read Marianne’s article and can apply her theories and thoughts from that article to the scenario provided. Feel free to rely on the information you know about the situations (if real) or analogize to another one, if you wish. Include in your answer at least two specific concepts from Marianne’s article, and apply those concepts to your reasoning in your answer. You will be graded on your knowledge of the article as well as the application of ethical theories to international situations.
An oil travesty has occurred. In the Gulf Coast, British Petroleum’s deep-sea oil well has had a major malfunction and has exploded. The explosion killed many oil workers. The oil well began spewing oil into the Gulf, and now the entire southern portion of the United States coastal areas has been destroyed.
BP initially came out with advertisements using the CEO of the company apologizing and promising to make this right for the citizens of the United States. Then, the CEO was removed by BP from working the disaster. The crisis continues. Based on the “timing” of the crisis and resolutions that have occurred at the time of your exam, answer the following question using the most relevant facts you know.
Using Marianne Jenning’s article, would an international code of ethics have assisted with the handling of this crisis? Would it have helped BP avoid this crisis? Do you see this as an ethical issue? Support your answer with concepts from her article, as well as other ethical reasons.
6. Question : TCO A. Use the fact pattern you received in the above Marianne Jennings “International Code of Ethics” question to answer this question. Analyze and propose a solution to the problem you received above using the front page of the newspaper method. Show the steps, apply the facts, and provide a proposed solution you would suggest.