Business Ethic Yale Ethical analysis For Deutsche Bank

WRITING ASSIGNMENT 2DUE ON BLACKBOARD BY 12:00PM
ON FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2019
BUS 215-020
Answer the following questions based upon your assigned readings and class materials. IF
YOU USE ANOTHER SOURCE FOR YOUR ANSWER, YOU MUST CITE THAT SOURCE, but
please be advised that other sources may give information that is not as discussed or presented in
class and will not provide additional credit.
Your answers must be in complete sentences and free of typographical errors.
Your writing assignment must be saved as either as WORD documents or in PDF, with doublespaced, 1” margins. The assignment must be well written and professional in appearance. Your
completed assignment must be uploaded onto Blackboard for submission. NO OTHER
FORMATS WILL BE ACCEPTED. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS. If you submit a document
in an alternate format that cannot be opened in Blackboard, you will receive a 0 on the assignment.
Please contact the HELP desk for technological issues.
SHORT ANSWER/ESSAY QUESTIONS
1.
Caitlyn, who just turned eighteen, is out with several friends. They decide to see a movie,
but it is sold out. Caitlyn hides in the back of the theatre and yells “Fire” as loudly as she can. The
theatre empties, allowing Caitlyn and her friends (or so they think) to watch the movie.
Unfortunately, a theatre employee saw Caitlin yelling, called the police, and she is arrested. Caitlyn
tells police officers that she’s merely exercising her free speech rights. She adds that the employee
is lying and that she personally saw him stealing popcorn. The theatre employee tells Caitlyn that
he will sue her for defamation, to which her response is that she would win based on her right to
free speech. Discuss whether or not Caitlyn is right on both counts and why.
2.
How is arbitration preferable to litigation, and what are criticisms of arbitration as
compared to litigation?
3.
Melanie and Gabriela have a dispute regarding ownership of a dog, Buddy. Gabriela
removed Buddy’s tags in order to give him a bath. Knowing what was coming, Buddy made a run
for it and ended up at Melanie’s home down the street. When Gabriela saw Melanie walking
Buddy, she demanded his return. Melanie refused. A lawyer in the neighborhood suggested either
a neutral case evaluation or mediation in an attempt to resolve the feud. Describe mediation and
neutral case evaluation. Which would you suggest and why?
4.
Explain the commerce clause and its connections to business.
1
5.
Sam, a resident of New Mexico, claims that Pet Food Company, Inc., put out some dog
food that made his dog, Champ, sick. Champ is a prize-winning poodle. Champ survived the pet
food fiasco only after traveling to a veterinarian in Florida that specializes in poodles and only
because Champ had two very expensive surgeries. Additionally, Champ’s ability to breed has been
impaired, and Sam will earn no more breeding fees from Champ. Sam’s damages are $100,000.
Pet Food Company, Inc., is incorporated in Delaware, with its principal place of business in New
Mexico. Sam asks you whether he can sue in federal court. What would you tell Sam and why?
______________________________________________________________________________
SAMPLE RESPONSE
To get full credit on a question that requires fact application and analysis, please follow the
following format in paragraph form.
Rule: Explain the law.
Holding/Decision: Decide how the facts fit into the law.
Reasoning: Explain why/how you came to that conclusion.
For example:
Question: Plaintiff is an importer of German beer. The defendants, Home Beverage Depot
(hereinafter “HBD”), operates as a beer distributor. Are the parties considered merchants under
the UCC?
Answer:
The UCC defines a merchant as a person who deals in goods of the kind, or
otherwise by his occupation, holds himself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the
practices or goods involved in the transaction, or to whom such knowledge or skill may be
attributed by his employment of an agent or broker or other intermediary who, by his occupation,
holds himself out as having such knowledge or skill. (RULE)
In this scenario, both the plaintiff and defendant are merchants (HOLDING) because they
both deal with beer, the goods in question, and as an importer and distributor, they presumably
have knowledge and skills associated with the importation and distribution of beer.
(REASONING)
2