The Case Involving Birch & Davis International, Inc.

The case that I have chosen to discuss is Case 85 Cal.Rptr.2d 844 (1999) 978 P.2d 2 20 Cal.4th 785 Peter Ramirez, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. YOSEMITE WATER COMPANY, INC., Defendant am Respondent, No. S070114, Supreme Court of California, June 17, 1999.

The definition of exceeds authorized access provided in the CFAA does not suggest it applies to misuse, “[b]y its plain terms, this definition also speaks to access, not use.” JCBHoldings NY, LLC v. Pakter, 931 F. Supp.2d 514, 523 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). The Ninth Circuit fittingly adopted a narrow interpretation of the CFAA in Nosal. 676 F.3d at 863. There, the defendant (Nosal) resigned from his job and convinced some of his former colleagues to give him confidential information using their authorized access to help him start his own competing business. Id. at 856. Company policy forbade disclosure of confidential information. Id. The district court dismissed the claim, reasoning “[t]here is simply no way to read [the definition of ‘exceeds authorized access’] to incorporate corporate policies governing use of information unless the word alter is interpreted to mean misappropriate,” as “[s]uch an interpretation would defy the plain meaning of the word alter, as well as common sense.” Id.

This case clarifies who is defined as a supervisor in harassment lawsuits. The opinion of the case states that “an employee is a supervisor for purposes of … liability under Title VII if he or she is empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the victim.” This means that if the employee fired, demoted, disciplined, changed the work schedule of, or transferred the victim, etc. then the employer is liable for harassment. But, if the person is a manager without the power to change the victim’s employment status, then the employer is not liable for harassment so long as the employer established a system that allowed the victim to notify senior management of the harassment so that senior management could deal with the harassing

GREENVILLE, S.C. - A 47-year-old sales leader with experience in the textile industry was unlawfully fired by Indian Land, S.C., textile manufacturer Keer America Corporation because of his age, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed today.

Several examples of a violation of privacy are found in court cases regarding drones [4]. In Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, Dow Chemical filed suit against the EPA for contracting a commercial aerial photographer to provide images of the Dow Chemical manufacturing facility. In California v. Ciraolo, a small airplane was used to photograph backyard marijuana cultivation in order to obtain a search warrant.

Plaintiff can win the lawsuit against the defendant, Martin Motors Inc. This paper will go over different issues and factors that can be used to determine why the David Smith will be successful in the lawsuit against Martin Motors Inc.

The following report will be on the Peyton Company and show the variances and the reasons for the variances. The analysis of the operating budget will be a brief discussion on the companies variances, I will compare them to the budget and them compare the actual results. There are different operating budgets that have various differences in costing methods, sales projections and labor based on the profit margin desired. Therefore, I shall show the components of the variances that have a contributing factor to the cause, ending with a conclusion as to the key factors that the results can lead you too.

The utilization of technology in organizations avails leaders an upper hand in the business world over their competitors. Coupled with strategic management strategies and a vigorous business plan technology is a resourceful implement. Infelicitously, technology is not impeccable or impeccable and still requires productive monitoring and updates. Eminently, the dilemma in the case study for Knights Capital Americas LLC evolved from several issues. The first issue is the electronically mail that was sent out notifying employees of the incapacitated error was not acknowledged until the error was out of control. Second, the discontinued program was still located within the software and neglected. Conclusively, the company made a vital error when the shut down the incipient software escalating the occurring issue. Nevertheless, the deeper causes within this case escalated from both faulty communication and a lack of jeopardy management. “Organisations face internal and external actors and influences that make it uncertain whether, when, and the extent to which they will achieve or exceed

“The federal securities laws require public companies to disclose information on an ongoing basis. For example, domestic companies must submit annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K for a number of specified events and must comply with a variety of other disclosure requirements. The annual report on Form 10-K provides a comprehensive overview of the company's business and financial condition and includes audited financial statements.” (Coach Inc.)

In the case of Integrity Staffing Solutions Inc. v. Busk, employees Jesse Busk and Laurie Castro-employees of a contractor who completes orders for Amazon.com-filed a class action lawsuit, claiming that they and thousands of their other employees must be retroactively compensated and receive compensation for damages for time. that happened at the security checkpoint when leaving work. The workers said that the process to prevent theft can take as long as 25 minutes. The workers alleged that they were required to remove personal items such as their keys, their purses and their belts and go through a checkpoint that took at least 25 minutes on some occasions. They argue that since the company forced them to do this, they must compensate them

1. Which regulator proposed that his agency should start granting banking licenses to “fintech” firms?

D-Bart Industries is an organization in that manufacturing industry that fabricates precision parts for medical equipment and airplane parts. This newly formed firm was created from the merger of two previous competitors, Davis Manufacturing and Bartlund Technologies. Moreover, these organizations were managed significantly different: Erik Bartlund greatly empowered his employees and fostered a climate of innovation and product development, while Ted Davis relied on a stringent hierarchy of command and control to create quality products. Also, Davis industries were unionized, while Bartlund remained nonunion, a structure that was carried over to D-Bart.

Dan Pfeffer is President of Thermal Energy Partners LLC and is responsible for the company’s strategic direction as a retail electric provider and renewable energy generation company. Mr. Pfeffer also oversees the company's day-to-day operations and development of business strategy and initiatives. Prior to joining TEP, Dan was Executive Managing Director and Co-Founder of New World Realty Advisors, LLC where he received numerous accolades for his work with highly complex financial structuring, hybrid tax increment financing structures, tax credit utilization and others.

Citadel Securities is looking to become a primary Treasury dealer as it looks to expand in a marker once dominated by large banks. Citadel’s interest to become a primary dealer was ignited after the New York Fed recently announced last week it would reduce the minimum net regulatory capital requirement for brokers down to $50 million from $150 million. The rule change lessened the barriers to enter the market as part of the New York Fed’s efforts to expand the amount of firms eligible to apply to for primary dealer status, according to the announcement. At the same time, Citadel said its desire to become a primary dealer grew due to the significant credibility that comes with the exclusive status. Citadel currently operates in only the most recently issued Treasury securities. Source

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Tiger Asia Management, LLC, Tiger Asia Partners, LLC, Sung Kook (a/k/a BILL) Hwang & Raymond Y.H. Park