Are these 2 statements accurate

Hi Class,

I think the judge's analogies utilized by the North Shore Bank were effective. Similar to Isaac's case, the case of North Shore Bank is founded on a fake. One thing stands out in the North Shore case: instead of taking any action against a fake check, the bank just paid it out of the defendant's account. The bank should have refunded the money after recognizing their mistake, but instead they kept the charge on his account and dishonored subsequent checks. Due to "humiliation, embarrassment, and having been turned down for credit for the first time in his life," according to the material provided, the damage granted in this case was ascribed to mental distress (Palmer v. North Shore Bank, 1975).

Contrarily, in Isaac's instance, the bank intervened as soon as it became aware that Isaac had been found guilty of stealing and that Isaac may have been involved with the counterfeit checks (Twin City Bank v. Isaacs, 1984). Even when the police cleared Mr. Isaacs, the bank insisted on keeping his account closed for the subsequent four years. Therefore, I believe the North Shore Bank comparison was appropriate.

The purpose of disclosure public is just making the information of the data accessible and available to all interested parties and organizations. We need to understand first, a manager just follow rule from the highest, but If I were the bank manager, I would act different. Maybe as a manager I would give advice how to manage this situation. Sometimes an individual decides to protect a certain reputation that has already been established or even makes a decision in an effort to positively affect the reputation when they start to consider what the public could think of an organization based on a decision they may make. The error was to continue when the determination on the case was already

statement 2

M6.4 Case Problem on The Twin City Bank v. Kenneth Isaacs

• The judge uses North Shore Bank to make analogies with the Isaacses' case. Do you think this analogy is effective?

In the case of The Twin City Bank v. Kenneth Isaacs, I think the judge correctly referenced the North Shore Bank case as an analogy and that it was very effective. One of the main points in the North Shore Bank case was the judgement that was awarded. It was awarded for mental anguish based on Palmer suffering humiliation and embarrassment from being denied credit for the first time ever. What happened in both cases are different, but the Isaacs' did suffer humiliation and embarrassment. Their vehicles were repossessed by the same bank that was holding their money after the fact that police cleared Mr. Isaacs from having anything to do with the forges. Also, they suffered a traumatic effect in their lives because the Isaacs' credit reputation with Twin City Bank was described by the bank as "impeccable" then it was ruined. They obviously lost their credit standing with Twin City, and were unable to secure credit commercially at other institutions because of their status at Twin City.

• Suppose you are the bank manager who decided to keep a freeze on the Isaacses' funds for four years. If your actions are guided by the public disclosure test, would you have behaved differently?

If my actions was guided by the public disclosure test, I believe I would have behaved differently. The text describes public disclosure test as our actions are being broadcasted on television. As the bank manager it is my ethical responsibility to recognize, interpret and act upon multiple principles and values according to the standards within a given field and/or context. One thing I would have done differently is not hold the funds for four years. After the police reported that Mr. Isaacs had nothing to do with the crime, I would have removed the hold on the account. I believe Mr Isaacs was proven innocent by the cops, but his past conviction of burglary was the determining factor to keep the hold. I do not believe that was right.