Jim recorded a bunch of statements in which she said some nasty things about Don. He then purposely placed the recording as a downloadable file on his Internet website. One of the statements was that Don, an architect, could not design a dog house that would meet the requirements of the building code. This statement is: None of these answers is correct. O Slander. O Libel. O Slander per se.

Jim recorded a bunch of statements in which she said some nasty things about Don. He then purposely placed the recording as a downloadable file on his Internet website. One of the statements was that Don, an architect, could not design a dog house that would meet the requirements of the building code. This statement is: None of these answers is correct. O Slander. O Libel. O Slander per se.

Business Its Legal Ethical & Global Environment

10th Edition

ISBN:9781305224414

Author:JENNINGS

Publisher:JENNINGS

Chapter20: Management Of Employee Welfare

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 10QAP

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Able, a Certified Fraud Examiner, interviewed a suspect involved in an environmental crime. The suspect, Blake, admitted to purposely polluting the environment. Blake’s action eventually caused almost thirty people to develop serious environmentally related illness. Upon hearing this fact from Blake, Able should: A. Scold Blake for his conduct. B. Make no comment whatever. C. Treat Blake with decency and respect. D. Ask Blake to apologize to the victims.
Please describe a time when you were faced with a personal dilemma regarding whether to blow the whistle on a wrongdoing. Some examples of a wrongdoing are witnessing cheating on an exam, witnessing someone trying to steal, noticing someone trying to take advantage of another, and completing a project at work without recording time spent in order to meet time constraints. Who were the stakeholders in the situation and how were they impacted by the wrongdoing? How did rationalization encourage the wrongdoer to follow through with their wrongdoing? What did you do and why?
Please describe a time when you were faced with a personal dilemma regarding whether to blow the whistle on a wrongdoing. Some examples of a wrongdoing are witnessing cheating on an exam, witnessing someone trying to steal, noticing someone trying to take advantage of another, and completing a project at work without recording time spent in order to meet time constraints. Who were the stakeholders in the situation and how were they impacted by the wrongdoing? How did rationalization encourage the wrongdoer to follow through with their wrongdoing? What did you do and why? Case scenario: for someone working but not clocking in How would this fit under this dilemma? Please explain:
Mr. Arty works for Smile Accounting Firm as a senior accountant. Currently, he is doing a review of rental property compliance testing of rental receipts and expenses of the property owned by the client. He determines that the staff accountants tested only two tenants per property, instead of the three required by the audit program based on materiality considerations. However, to request more information from the client would cause massive delays, and the manager on the engagement is pressing hard for the information now. The manager did approach the client, who stated that she “needed the report yesterday.” The manager reminds Arty that no problems were found from the testing of the two properties, in past years the workpapers called for just two properties to be reviewed, the firm has never had any accounting issues with respect to the client, and he is confident the testing is sufficient. Explain the relationship between the manager’s explanations and the judgment tendencies.
Nadine visits Urban Air, a trampoline park. Before Nadine can enter the trampoline park, Urban Air requires her to sign a release stating that Urban Air will not be held responsible for any injury of any kind that Nadine incurs while on Urban Air property, no matter what the cause of the injury is. While Nadine is jumping on a trampoline, her boyfriend Trevor joins her. Trevor’s ex-girlfriend Valarie, who is an Urban Air employee, becomes enraged and pushes Nadine off the trampoline. Nadine breaks an arm in the incident. Who can Nadine sue for her injuries? a) Urban Air only b) Nadine cannot sue anyone because she signed a release of liability form. c) Valarie and Urban Air Select correct answer
Other Responsibilities and Practices Cases. Read the following cases. For each, statewhether the action or situation shows a violation or potential for violation of the AICPACode of Professional Conduct; if so, explain why, and cite the relevant rule.a. CPA Ron Stout completed a review of the unaudited financial statements of Wolfe Gifts.Arvida Wolfe was very displeased with the report. An argument ensued, and she toldStout never to darken her door again. Two days later, she telephoned Stout and demandedthat he return (1) Wolfe’s cash disbursement journal, (2) Stout’s documentation scheduleof adjusting journal entries, (3) Stout’s inventory analysis documentation, and (4) allother documentation prepared by Stout. Wolfe had not yet paid her bill, so Stout repliedthat state law gave him a lien on all of the records and he would return them as soon asshe paid his fee.b. CPA O’Dell May teaches a CPA review course at the university. He needs problem andquestion material for students’…
Hunn injured herself when she slipped and fell on a loose plank while walking down some steps. The night before, while entering the hotel, she had noticed that the steps were dangerous, and although she knew from her earlier stays at the hotel that another exit was available, she chose that morning to leave via the dangerous steps. The hotel was aware of the hazard, as one of the other guests who had fallen that night had reported his accident to the desk clerk then on duty. Still, the hotel did not place cautionary signs on the steps to warn of the danger, and they were not roped off or otherwise excluded from use. Hunn brought an action against the hotel for injuries she sustained as a result of her fall. Should she recover? Explain.
Alma and Jean wrote a business proposal for their local partner, the GIF Corporation. They submitted the proposal to Mr. John Uy, the CEO of the said company. Upon checking, Mr. Uy found out that the business proposal had faulty details about the GIF Corporation. Also, Mr. Uy got tired of reading the entire proposal as it contained unimportant parts. Since Mr. Uy is a busy person, he did not have enough time to read everything in the proposal and resorted to asking Alma and Jean to revise the entire document. Question: Evaluate what characteristic (s) of effective technical communication is not observed and provide a discussion of why you say so
Ms. Sarah is an auditor without any staff, and since then she is doing her works without planning. Her routines are like this: she will start auditing one company and when another company will call, she will accept it, will start working on the second proposal without finishing the first proposal. She got complains and some of the clients even threated to sue her in court for breaching a contract which she did not fulfill it, that leads her the to problems and to the clients. Based on the above scenario: 1. Prepare clear instructions on how she will manage her auditing works. 2. Design an specific doable audit program for her clients to make them satisfied.
Ms. Sarah is an auditor without any staff, and since then she is doing her works without planning. Her routines are like this: she will start auditing one company and when another company will call, she will accept it, will start working on the second proposal without finishing the first proposal. She got complains and some of the clients even threated to sue her in court for breaching a contract which she did not fulfill it, that leads her the to problems and to the clients. Based on the above scenario: Design an specific doable audit program for her clients to make them satisfied.
Alice promised to give you a car if Mark will pass the CPA board examination. When Mark passed the said examination, Alice refused to give the car on the ground that the condition was a purely potestative one. Is Alice correct or not?
Hanover leased a portion of his farm to Brown and Black, doing business as the Colorite Hatchery. Brown went upon the premises to remove certain chicken sheds that he and Black had placed there for hatchery purposes. Thinking that Brown intended to remove certain other sheds, which were Hanover’s property, Hanover accosted Brown, who willfully struck Hanover and knocked him down. Brown then ran to the Colorite truck, which he had previously loaded with chicken coops, and drove back to the hatchery. On the way, he picked up George, who was hitchhiking to the city to look for a job. Brown was driving at seventy miles an hour down the highway. At an open intersection with another highway, Brown in his hurry ran a stop sign, striking another vehicle. The collision caused severe injuries to George. Immediately thereafter, the partnership was dissolved, and Brown was insolvent. Hanover and George each bring separate actions against Black as copartner for the alleged tort committed by Brown…