Please help me to get the answer for the 4 questions

Question on this photo

marks Window Help 1) 89 Ims.seu.edu.sa rana saced a... - up Upload Assignment.. Blackboard Collabo. se ss your ability to: Apply legal principles to fact patterns that emerge on a regular basis in the business world. Recognize, analyze, and discuss various legal problems presented in specific situations. Develop critical thinking and case analysis skills. on Items 1. For Week 2, you will analyze the cases in the Questions and Problems based on the group to which your instructor assigns you. o Group 1: Chapter 2 (4, 5, and 7) in Dynamic Business Law o Group 2: Chapter 2 (8-10) in Dynamic Business Law 2. For each assigned case, analyze the issue based on the following criteria: o Identify the parties involved in the case dispute (who is the plaintiff and who is the defendant). o Identify the facts associated with the case and fact patterns. Develop the appropriate legal issue(s) in question (i.e., the specific legal issue between the two parties).Provide a judgment on who should win the case - be clear. Support your decision with an appropriate rule of law. 3. Be prepared to defend your decision and to objectively evaluate the other points of view. Submission Instructions Submit your assignment per your professor's instructions. Grading Criteria Comprehensive analysis of the case and the legal issues involved: 0 - 10 points When finished, make sure to click Submit. Optionally, click Save as Draft to save changes and continue working later, or click Cancel to quit without saving changes. Cancelmarks Window Help 1) 89 Ims.seu.edu.sa rana saced a... - up Upload Assignment.. Blackboard Collabo. se ss your ability to: Apply legal principles to fact patterns that emerge on a regular basis in the business world. Recognize, analyze, and discuss various legal problems presented in specific situations. Develop critical thinking and case analysis skills. on Items 1. For Week 2, you will analyze the cases in the Questions and Problems based on the group to which your instructor assigns you. o Group 1: Chapter 2 (4, 5, and 7) in Dynamic Business Law o Group 2: Chapter 2 (8-10) in Dynamic Business Law 2. For each assigned case, analyze the issue based on the following criteria: o Identify the parties involved in the case dispute (who is the plaintiff and who is the defendant). o Identify the facts associated with the case and fact patterns. Develop the appropriate legal issue(s) in question (i.e., the specific legal issue between the two parties).Provide a judgment on who should win the case - be clear. Support your decision with an appropriate rule of law. 3. Be prepared to defend your decision and to objectively evaluate the other points of view. Submission Instructions Submit your assignment per your professor's instructions. Grading Criteria Comprehensive analysis of the case and the legal issues involved: 0 - 10 points When finished, make sure to click Submit. Optionally, click Save as Draft to save changes and continue working later, or click Cancel to quit without saving changes. Cancelim on the bruin of religion Do you agree with Friedman? Do employers have hand. ENI, however, argued that the regulation vio- a duty to respect the belich of their employees? Lated the company's First Amendment right to free If so, what happens when that duty conflicts with speech. How do you think the court should have employers' duty to provide a safe and healthy work ruled in this case? Do you think ENI might have environment? [Friedman E Southern California ahered its decision to broadcast the execution if it "Group, 102 Cal. App. 4th 39 had applied the Golden Rule? [Enin't Network 41 of 688 Inc. v. Lappin, 134 F. Supp. 24 1002 (2001)] Chapter 2 Business Ethics 7. Ement Price went to a dock in 1997, seeking Reynolds failed to adequately warn consumers Oxycontin to treat pain related to sickle cell ang- about the dangers of smoking. Prior to 1970. mia. Between November 1979 and October 2000, Camel cigarettes were sold without a warning Price sought Oxycontin prescriptions from at lead label. After the Labeling Act of 1906, Reynolds ten different doctors at ton different clinics in two began to put warning labels on packages of cities, filling the prescriptions of seven pharmacies cigarettes, Guilbeault believes that Reynolds knew in three cities. The doctors were notified of Price's about the adverse health consequences of smoking medication-seeking behavior, and the doctor dis- before 1970 and, therefore, that Reynolds had a continued Price's treatment. Price then Filed suit. duty to warn consumers of these comequences. claiming his doctors, pharmacies, and the pharma- Do you agree with his argument? Should Reynolds ceuticalscompanies that manufactured Oxycontin have warned consumers carlier? [Gulbrawl k had breached their duty by failing to adequately 4. J. Remalls Tobacco Co., 44 Fed. R. Sere. 34 war Price of the addictive nature of Oxycontin. 124 (1599).1 How do you think the court responded to Price's claims? Think about all the stakeholders involved 10. Brave Higher Education Service Corporation. in wich a case: how would those parties be affected Inc., was a nonprofit student loan company by a ruling in favor of Price? In favor of the doc- Brazen allowed one of its employees to store fors and pharmaceutical companies? |Ernest Price customers" personal financial information on a The Pardar Pharma Co., 920 50. 24 479; 2006 laptop with an unencrypted hard drive, The laptop Miss. LEXIS 67 (3006)] warns subsequently stolen from the employee's home during a robbery. Brazos had no way of . Javier Clolindo, the husband of Richard Clark's knowing which customer" information was housekeeper, was sitting in his car, parked in the contained on the laptop's hard drive or whether the driveway of Clark's house, waiting to pick up his information would be accessed by a third party. As wife, While he was waiting, a leaning 80-fort tree a precaution, Brazos notified all of its customers located on an adjacent property fell on Galindo's that their information may have been accessed car and killed him. Galindo's wife wed Clark. by a third party and offered each customer six alleging that Clark was liable for failing to notily months of identity theft monitoring. One customer. Galindo about the danger posed by the leaning tree. Quin, brought suit against Brazos for negligence, Do you think that Clark had a legal responsbility to tell Galindo about the tree? Do you think Clark claiming that Brazos had failed to adequately had an ethical responsibility to tell Galindo about protect his financial information, thereby causing Guin harm. Guin's information was never accessed the tree ? Why might the answer to these questions by a third party. and Guin never suffered identity be different? [Galindo .. Town of Clarkstown. 2 theft. How might other baninesses be affected if NY. 34 633 (2004).] Guin's Lawsuit weccoded? Do you think Brazos 9. Doctors diagnosed Leo Guilbeault with lung cancer. win wrong to store its customers" financial He had been smoking the same brand, Camel information on an unencrypted laptop hard drive? cigarettes, since 1951, Guilbeault filed a complaint IStacy Lawton Guin v. Brazen Higher Education against the manufacturer of Camel cigarettes, Service Corporation, Inc. 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. According to Guilbeault. #846 (3006).] Looking for more review material? The Online Learning Center at www.mhhe.com/kuhawkle contains thin chapter's "Assignment on the Internet" and also a list of URLs for more information, entitled "On the Internet." Find both of them in the Student Center portion of the OLC, along with quieres and other helpful material. Appendix 2A Theories of Business Ethics Ethical Relativism and Situational Ethics An ethical school of thought that may seem appealing on the surface is ethical relative ism. Ethical relativism is a theory of ethics that denies the existence of objective moral standards, Rather, according to ethical relativism, individuals must evaluate actions on the basis of what they feel is best for themselves. Ethical relativism holds that when two indi- viduals disagree over a question about morality. both individuals are correct because so objecthe standard exists to evaluate their actions, Indeed, morality is relative, and thus to one can criticize another's behavior as immoral. Many people find ethical relativism anne- tive because it promotes tolerance. Ethical relativism mary appear attractive at first glance, but very few people are willing to accept the logical conclusions of this theory. For example, ethical relativism requires that we see murder as a moval action as long as the murderer believes that the action is best for himcle rus of criticizing behavior in wivism and must develop a more