Midterm accounting 201

Question 9:

The case of Compensatory Damages

Plaintiff claims that as a result of defendant's actions, it was unable to meet its customers' requirements in a timely manner and a number of its customers terminated their business with the plaintiff. It is a breach of contractual obligations which led to losses for the plaintiff. The defendant should not have operated in North American markets and particularly with the customers of the plaintiff. Defendant's actions were not justified, warranted, or excusable.

The case for Punitive Damages

Punitive damages are not recoverable solely for breach of contractual obligations. Punitive damages are awarded only in the most egregious circumstances and are aimed at punishing the offending party. For a plaintiff to seek punitive damages for this type of interference with a contract, the plaintiff must prove the defendant acted intentionally maliciously with help of clear and convincing evidence. In support of the claim, plaintiff alleges it had contracts with numerous customers to supply them with components defendant agreed to manufacture; defendant knew the plaintiff had contracted with such customers; defendant knew plaintiff's customers depended on plaintiff to supply them with such components and that a failure on defendant's part to manufacture the components in conformity with the 2002 Agreement would disrupt and possibly destroy plaintiff's customer relations and harm them financially

Source: httn://caselaw.findlaw.com/

Question 5:

It is highly likely that the court will dismiss her appeal. It will be dismissed because of Ladd allegation that the Brewers took photographs of her in the stands at baseball parks and disseminated her "mug shot" and information about the injunction and the spring training incident. None of these involved private places, using her likeness for advertising or trade, or depictions of nudity. These events occurred at public places and hence do not amount to an invasion of privacy. Ann Ladd will lose the appeal.

The Paula Jones case precipitated Clinton's impeachment. Charges of perjury and obstruction of justice were brought against Clinton based on statements he made during the depositions for the Jones lawsuit. The specific statements were about the nature of his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, with whom he denied having a sexual relationship.

The basis of the defamation claim is that NBC made Zimmerman appear racist by doctoring a 911 recording so as to make it appear that Zimmerman made an unsolicited identification of Trayvon Martin.

Question 6:

In this case, the U.S. court upheld the change. It applied its common law principle, which seeks the greatest good for the greatest number of people – even outside the boundaries of the United States. Enforcing Canadian import laws presented no clear danger to international relations but rather applied reasonable Canadian Law, so the smugglers were, in fact, charged with and found guilty of U.S. wire fraud.

Question 4:

Despite the high bar for finding waiver, the waiver was found in Cingular. In that case, the defendant waited three years after Unity commenced the suit and the parties had engaged in extensive pretrial activity to file a motion to compel arbitration. The district court found waiver, and the Fifth Circuit agreed, determining that the parties had been substantially involved in the litigation process and that the discovery on arbitral issues had prejudiced the non-moving party. The court also dismissed Cingular‘s argument that the three-year delay was due to issues largely outside of its control, including the effects Hurricane Katrina had on the Southern District of Mississippi. In doing so, the circuit court reminded practitioners that it is the content of the delay, and not necessarily the time, that matters.