When applying the rule of reason to determine whether an agreement violates Section 1 of the Sherman Act, a court will not consider. a. the purpose of the agreement. b. the parties' market ability to implement the agreement. c. the effect of the agreement on international trade. d. the potential effect of the agreement on competition. Karen is a judge hearing the case of Local Dispatch Co. v. National Transport Corp. Applying the relevant of to the facts of the case requires Karen to find previously decided cases that, in relation to the rule law case under con-sidera-tion, are a. as different as possible. b. as similar as possible. c. at odds. d. exactly identical. Picabo drives a truck as an employee for Quik Delivery, Inc. Picabo would most likely be considered acting outside the scope of her employment if she a. crashed into a car at the airport while off duty. b. hit a pedestrian in a parking lot during a "working" lunch. c. ran over an attendant at Quik's gas station while refueling the truck. d. smashed into a store-front while intoxicated on-duty. Ralph, a van driver for Speedy Delivery Company, causes a multi-vehicle accident on a city street. Ralph and Speedy are liable to a. all those who were injured. b. only those who were uninsured. c. only those whose injuries could have been reasonably foreseen. d. only those whose vehicles were closest to Ralph's van. Quality Metals Company and Superior Fabrication, Inc., enter into a contract under which Quality Metals agrees to deliver a certain quantity of sheet metal to Superior Fabrication each month. The contract does not include a price term. In a suit between the parties over the price, will a. determine a reasonable price. b. impose the lowest market price. c. impose the highest market price. d. return the parties to the positions they held before the contract. When applying the rule of reason to determine whether an agreement violates Section 1 of the Sherman Act, a court will not consider. a. the purpose of the agreement. b. the parties' market ability to implement the agreement. c. the effect of the agreement on international trade. d. the potential effect of the agreement on competition. Karen is a judge hearing the case of Local Dispatch Co. v. National Transport Corp. Applying the relevant of to the facts of the case requires Karen to find previously decided cases that, in relation to the rule law case under con-sidera-tion, are a. as different as possible. b. as similar as possible. c. at odds. d. exactly identical. Picabo drives a truck as an employee for Quik Delivery, Inc. Picabo would most likely be considered acting outside the scope of her employment if she a. crashed into a car at the airport while off duty. b. hit a pedestrian in a parking lot during a "working" lunch. c. ran over an attendant at Quik's gas station while refueling the truck. d. smashed into a store-front while intoxicated on-duty. Ralph, a van driver for Speedy Delivery Company, causes a multi-vehicle accident on a city street. Ralph and Speedy are liable to a. all those who were injured. b. only those who were uninsured. c. only those whose injuries could have been reasonably foreseen. d. only those whose vehicles were closest to Ralph's van. Quality Metals Company and Superior Fabrication, Inc., enter into a contract under which Quality Metals agrees to deliver a certain quantity of sheet metal to Superior Fabrication each month. The contract does not include a price term. In a suit between the parties over the price, will a. determine a reasonable price. b. impose the lowest market price. c. impose the highest market price. d. return the parties to the positions they held before the contract
