FINAL CASE ANALYSIS !!!

In evaluating your case analyses, instructors will apply the Case Analysis Grading Rubric. Each case analysis should be a 5–7 pages and follow the current APA guidelines. Title page and reference page ARE INCLUDED IN THE PAGE COUNT and current APA formatting is required. DUE Saturday 9/29/18

I copied and pasted the case you have to read to do the analysis on. Its bolded.

The basic guidelines for analyzing ethical case are as follows:

1. Issues

a. What are the major moral or ethical issues raised by the case?

b. What are the major factual issues raised by the case?

c. What are the major conceptual issues raised by this case?

d. Who are the major stakeholders in this case?

e. How are the issues in this case related to making ethical decisions?

2. Options

a. What are the major views on the conceptual issues raised by this case?

b. What are the main alternative actions or policies that might be followed in responding to the ethical issues in this case?

c. What facts are unknown or disputed that might be relevant to deciding this case (may require research to determine some facts)?

3. Ethical Arguments

a. Determine which of the four moral standards (egoism, natural law, utilitarianism, and respect for persons) apply to this case.

b. Identify the moral principles that can be invoked to support a conclusion as to what ought to be done ethically in this case or similar cases.

c. Determine whether the different moral standards yield converging or diverging judgments about what ought to be done.

4. Decision or Conclusion

a. Decide which of the identified options you would recommend or judge to be the ethically best way to deal with the issue presented in this case based upon which option has the strongest ethical reasons behind it.

b. Determine how a critic of your position might try to argue against it using other ethical reasons, and present a rebuttal or counter-argument in defense of your judgment.

c. Include a scripture to support your decision.

The purpose of these reports is to give you a chance to work out your own view about the issues raised by each case and to practice the procedure for analyzing ethical dilemmas. It is important that you include biblical references to defend your stance.

HERE IS THE CASE YOU HAVE TO READ FIRST

CASE 9-2 Bias v. Advantage International

On April 7, 1986, after the close of his college basketball career, [Len] Bias entered into a representation agreement with Advantage whereby Advantage agreed to advise and represent Bias in his affairs. Fentress was the particular Advantage representative servicing the Bias account. On June 17 of that year Bias was picked by the Boston Celtics in the first round of the National Basketball Association draft. On the morning of June 19, 1986, Bias died of cocaine intoxica- tion. The Estate sued Advantage and Fentress for two separate injuries allegedly arising out of the representation arrangement between Bias and [Advantage].

First, the Estate alleges that, prior to Bias’s death, Bias and his parents directed Fentress to obtain a one-million dollar life insur- ance policy on Bias’s life, that Fentress represented to Bias and Bias’s parents that he had secured such a policy, and that in reliance on Fentress’s assurances, Bias’s parents did not independently seek to buy an insurance policy on Bias’s life. Although [Advantage] did obtain increased disability coverage for Bias, in a one-million dollar disability insurance policy with an accidental death rider, they did not secure any life insurance coverage for Bias prior to his death.

Second, on June 18, 1986, the day after he was drafted by the Boston Celtics, Bias, through and with Fentress, entered into negotiations with Reebok International, Ltd. (“Reebok”) concerning a potential endorsement contract. The Estate alleges that after several hours of negotiations Fentress requested that Bias and his father leave so that Fentress could continue negotiating with Reebok representatives in private. The Estate alleges that Fentress then began negotiating a pro- posed package deal with Reebok on behalf of not just Bias, but also other players represented by Advantage. The Estate contends that Fen- tress breached a duty to Bias by negotiating on behalf of other play- ers, and that because Fentress opened up these broader negotiations he was unable to complete the negotiations for Bias on June 18. The Estate claims that as a result of Fentress’s actions, on June 19, when Bias died, Bias had no contract with Reebok. The Estate alleges that the contract that Bias would have obtained would have provided for an unconditional lump sum payment which Bias would have received up front.

Case Study Analysis Grading Rubric

Page 1 of 2

Page 1 of 2