business law 3

PART I: REVIEW 

Use the textbook to answer all questions. Answers must be complete, logical, thoughtful, supported by examples, and well written.

1. Define the following terms: trial, appeal, plaintiff, defendant, standing, jurisdiction, alternative dispute resolution, negotiation, arbitration, & mediation. (Doing this question will help you achieve unit learning goal one.)

2. Describe the process of and participants in civil of litigation.  What is the purpose of litigation? Is litigation collaborative or adversarial? (Doing this question will help you achieve unit learning goal one.)  

3. What is alternative dispute resolution?  Compare and contrast the benefits and drawbacks of ADR as compared to litigation.  (Doing this question will help you achieve unit learning goal two.)

PART II: CRITICAL THINKING

Complete one of the two scenarios below. Answers must be complete, logical, thoughtful, supported by examples, well written, and be at least 200 words in length. Cite your sources.  (Completing these questions will help you achieve unit learning goals two and three.)

FIRST SCENARIO

Loren Hills, a young back-up vocalist has an employment contract with the record label Cheapskates.  Based on confidential information she received from a friend in the human resources department, Loren knows that her contract pays her significantly less than two male back-up vocalists who signed at the same time as her and have about the same experience as her.  

1. Loren wants to start litigation against Cheapskates for sex discrimination.  What advice would you give her? What are the pros and cons to your advice? Explain.

2. Cheapskates wants to sue the employee in HR for revealing confidential information.  What advice would you give the company? What are the pros and cons to your advice? Explain.

3. Which type of dispute resolution would be best for Loren v. Cheapskates? Explain.

4. Which type of dispute resolution would be best for Cheapskates v. HR Employee?  Explain.

SECOND SCENARIO

Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. contracted with Heating Elements, Ltd. for parts required in the production of ovens. Heating Elements, Ltd. delivered nonconforming goods to Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. last month. Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. could not use the nonconforming goods, because they, by definition, are goods that do not conform to the specifications of the contract. Because of this problem, Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. had to halt production at its manufacturing plant since Heating Elements, Ltd. was the only producer of that particular part and there was no substitute readily available.

Since manufacturing was halted, the workforce at Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. was temporarily laid off. The employees were very upset about this, and they picketed Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. in hopes of returning to work immediately. The employees did not belong to a union. Each employee had an employment contract with Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. Those employment contracts had a mandatory arbitration clause which read:

In the event of a dispute arising between Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. and employee, employee forever waives all rights to initiate civil proceedings in a court of law related to the dispute. Instead, employee agrees that all disputes will be heard and settled in an arbitration proceeding. The arbitrator will be chosen by Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. The decision of the arbitrator will be binding and final.

The management of Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. demanded that Heating Elements, Ltd. cure the default by shipping goods that conformed to contract specifications. (Cure the default means to perform the obligations under the contract according to the specification of the contract.) Heating Elements, Ltd. insisted that the goods conformed to the contract specifications and refused to ship a new order of parts. Heating Elements, Ltd. refused to engage in any further discussion about this matter voluntarily. In fact, Heating Elements, Ltd. refused to accept telephone calls from the executives at Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. However, Heating Elements, Ltd. has demanded that Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. pay the invoice associated with the delivery of parts. Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. refused to pay the invoice until a new shipment is delivered that conforms to the contract specifications. Accordingly, all future business between Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. and Heating Elements, Ltd. has been suspended indefinitely.

Meanwhile, several customers who purchased ovens manufactured by Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. are experiencing malfunctions in their ovens. Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. believes that there is a manufacturing defect related to the a batch of parts delivered by Heating Elements, Ltd. and used by Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. in the production of those ovens. Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. did not notice a defect in those parts before using them to build those ovens, but it is highly suspicious that all of the malfunctions reported are related to Heating Elements, Ltd. Unfortunately for the consumers, the warranties have expired on all of the ovens in question.

Which type of dispute resolution would be best...

1. between Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. and Heating Elements, Ltd.? Why? What are the benefits and drawbacks to the type of dispute resolution that you have chosen? Explain.

2. between Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc. and its employees? Why? What are the benefits and drawbacks to the type of dispute resolution that you have chosen? Explain.

3. Between the consumers and Hi-Capacity Ovens, Inc.? Why? What are the benefits and drawbacks to the type of dispute resolution that you have chosen? Explain.

4. Between the consumers and Heating Elements, Ltd.? Why? What are the benefits and drawbacks to the type of dispute resolution that you have chosen? Explain.