for brilliant answer

1. Read the following scenario and answer the question in 5-10 sentences.

You work for a company that manufactures electric lawn mowers. The mowers work when the user plugs an extension cord into the outlet and into the receptacle on the machine. In order to start the machine, the user must pull a lever and hold it while pushing a button. You believe that your mower is extremely safe. It contains several warnings about using it only on grass, that it is not to be used to shred tree branches or other wood products, and that it is not to be used without the bag attachment for catching the grass that is thrown out the back. A customer sues your company after being hurt when he used the electric lawn mower during a rainstorm. Discuss whether or not your company should have included a warning label to address use of the electric lawn mower in the rain.

You work as a public affairs director for a small company that is traded on a public stock exchange. On Friday, your boss calls you into her office and tells you that she has received bad news – a new product that was supposed to “hit the shelves” on Monday is not going to be released because it failed some last minute safety tests. This product was highly publicized and the general public has indicated great excitement about getting the product. She asks you to draft the statement that will be released on Monday when the product delay is announced. When you return to your office, you make some notes at your desk, and then leave for dinner to clear your head so you can start working on the press release. While you are gone, a colleague stops by your desk to chat and sees your notes on the desk. That colleague, who owns stock in the company, immediately calls his stock broker and sells off his stock before the bad news is public. You and your colleague are arrested for insider trading. While you did not sell any stock to avoid a loss, you are charged with giving that information to your colleague. Explain whether or not you should be found guilty of insider trading.

You work for a large company that manufactures metal piping. At a trade show, you meet the Mining Minister from a foreign government. She oversees all mining operations for that government. She tells you that the country is interested in exporting raw metal to the United States to supplement the country’s treasury. She is willing to sell the metal to you for a very fair price. You consult with your boss and are given permission to sign a contract for $1 million of the metal from that country. You negotiate with her and sign a contract where that country will provide you a certain quantity of metal from its mines each month for a certain price. Two weeks later, you receive a letter from her assistant stating that the country will not be delivering the metal. Your boss wants to sue that country’s government for breach of contract. Discuss whether or not you will be able to sue that country’s government in a U.S. court.

You are a purchasing manager for a retailer of high-end kitchen products. You know that Malinox, Inc. is the best manufacturer of kitchen knives in the industry. Malinox brand kitchen knives would be an ideal complement to your store’s inventory, but you know that Malinox is selective with whom they sell their products. Consider what is legally necessary to make a valid offer to Malinox, and also consider the advantages to making the offer as specific as possible. Also evaluate any disadvantages to making an offer that is too specific.

You are an experienced small business owner who would like to become a franchisee of Quick Burger, a nationwide franchise of fast food restaurants. There are some Quick Burger restaurants in your area, but not so many that another franchise would be unprofitable. You are interested in maintaining as much day-to-day control in your potential franchise operations as possible. Before joining a franchise, you want to make sure that the essential terms are clear to both parties. Explain what issues you would need to resolve before entering into a franchise contract with Quick Burger.

You are one of nine partners of MobileWorks, a partnership organized to manufacture and sell mobile networking devices. You receive an email from a start-up competitor, NetraNet, who is interested in hiring you immediately in a highly-paid leadership position. The rumor is that NetraNet is rapidly developing more advanced networking technology than MobileWorks, which you would be eager to manage. However, the MobileWorks partnership agreement states that no partner can leave the partnership without giving sixty days of notice to the other partners. You know that waiting sixty days would be too long and you would miss out on key opportunities at NetraNet. From the perspectives of partnership law and business implications, evaluate the gains and losses from leaving the MobileWorks partnership immediately and joining NetraNet.

You run a small business and recently signed a lease for some property for your store. The landlord is a company named Cherry Street Associates, Inc. In the lease is a clause that requires the landlord to repair any defects (including electrical and plumbing problems) at the property during the term of the lease. During the third month of the lease, several significant plumbing issues occurred. You contacted the landlord’s representative and he never responded. Because of the nature of your business, you must have running water and so you paid $10,000 to have the plumbing repaired. When the landlord’s representative failed to respond to your request for reimbursement, you filed a lawsuit. During the discovery phase of the lawsuit, your attorney discovers that Cherry Street Associates, Inc. is owned by only one person, the representative who signed the lease and who has failed to communicate with you since. In addition, your attorney discovers that Cherry Street Associates, Inc. did not have records of any corporate meetings. The company was officially formed just 2 months prior to the signing of your lease. The company did not yet have a bank account and all money was deposited in the representative’s account, though the representative did provide a spreadsheet to show how he tracked the funds for the business separately from his personal funds. Explain whether or not you think the court would pierce the corporate veil in this situation.