(a)
Case summary: WP is a New York-based linen rental company. The company C is its competitor that deals in the same linen rental. The company WP’s customers breached their contract and entered into another agreement with the company C. The company WP filed a suit against the company C.
To find: Two important policy interest at odds in wrongful interference and their priority.
(b)
Case summary: WP is a New York-based linen rental company. The company C is its competitor that deals in the same linen rental. The company WP’s customers breached their contract and entered into another agreement with the company C. The company WP filed a suit against the company C.
To find: The general interest in soliciting business for profit is a sufficient defense.
![Check Mark](/static/check-mark.png)
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
![Blurred answer](/static/blurred-answer.jpg)
- 1. Basic Research LLC advertised its products on television networks owned by Rainbow Media Holdings Inc through an ad agency Icebox Advertising Inc. As Basic’s agent Icebox had express authority to buy ads from Rainbow on Basics behalf, but the authority was limited to buying ad with cash in advance. Despite this limit Rainbow sold ads to Basic through Icebox on credit. Basic paid Icebox for the ads, but Icebox did not pass all of the payments on to Rainbow. Icebox filed for bankruptcy. Can Rainbow recoup the unpaid amounts from Basic? Explain.2. Western Fire truck Inc contracted with Emergency One Inc (EO) to be its exclusive dealer in Wyoming and Colorado through Dec. 2003. James Costello, a Western Salesperson, was authorized to order EO vehicles for hi customers. Without informing Western, Costello emailed EO about Westerns diffuclties obtaining cash to fund its operations. He asked about the viability of Westerns contract and his possible employment with EO. On EO’s…arrow_forward2. The company's objects stated that it was to carry on a business as gown makers but the business had evolved into making veneered panels. No change had been made to the objects clause to reflect this change. A coal merchant had supplied coal to the company which was ordered on company notepaper headed with reference to the company being a veneered panel maker. The company subsequently refused to pay the coal merchant. – Can the company do so? Give reasons for your answer.arrow_forwardA co-worker of Illinois licensee Mona shared a client’s confidential information with her and asked Mona not to tell anyone. Instead of keeping it to herself, Mona gave the information to another licensee. Which statutory duty has been breached? Adhere to the brokerage agreement’s terms Employ reasonable skill and care in performing brokerage services for the client Keep all confidential information provided by the client confidential Serve the client’s best interestsarrow_forward
- 19) The Elle Corporation manufactures fingernail polish. Suzy buys a container of Elle's fingernail polish, applies it to her nails, and suffers a severe allergic reaction. She sues Elle under the implied warranty of merchantability, The test for determining whether Suzy will recover is whether: A) the nail polish she bought was suitable for the needs of the average consumer. B) the nail polish she bought properly performed its function of coloring one's nails. C) such a reaction in an appreciable number of consumers was reasonably foreseeable. D) the ingredient causing the reaction was foreign to the nail polish or natural to it. nating one model, Bobby noticesarrow_forwardMr. Antipatiko filed a suit against Gerald, a registered medical technologist. Mr. Antipatiko went to the clinic and requested for Hepa B test needed for his employment. It was Gerald who obtained the blood from Mr. Antipatiko and consequently processed it for sampling. However, the test result indicated a “REACTIVE/POSITIVE”. Gerald performed another confirmatory test to ensure a reliable result. Still, the second test done had the same result. Gerald then issued the lab result indicating “REACTIVE/POSITIVE” after conformity with the Pathologist. Mr. Antipatiko was declined employment and was so furious and went to the clinic to confront Gerald stating that the result was inaccurate. He threatened Gerald saying that he will file an administrative case against him. If you were Gerald, how will you address and handle the situation? Provide your reason and basis to prevent the threatened suit.arrow_forward13) When husband and wife live together, the law implies that the wife is authorized to use her husband's credit for necessaries suited to their style of living. Based on the above situation, the husband is an agent and the wife is a principal. a) True b) False 14) The person who gave assistance in agency relationship is known as agent. a) True b) False 15) The governing law for contract of sales is Sale of Goods Act 1957. a) True b) False 16) Goods means every kind of immovable property other than actionable claims and money. a) True b) False 17) Faiz meets Farhan, a car dealer and tells him that he wants a car that can move 20km/liter Farhan promotes one of the cars in the showroom and says that it suits the purpose. Faiz buys the car by relying on Farhan's representation. Subsequently Faiz finds that the car can move 15km/liter The above situation is an example of breach of warranty. a) True b) Falsearrow_forward
- Case: Brandt v. Boston Scientific Corporation and Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center Facts: Brenda Brandt was admitted to Bush Lincoln Health Center for treatment of urinary incontinence. She had a surgical procedure in which a sling was implanted. The manufacturer, Boston Scientific, recalled the item. Brenda had to have the sling surgically removed. She sued the manufacturer and the designer. In this case, Brandt’s bill from the Health Center reflects that of the $11,174.50 total charge for her surgery. $1,659.50, or 14.9%, was for the sling and its surgical kit. What provision of the UCC did the plaintiff sue under? What was the reasoning and decision of the court hearing the casearrow_forwardWhich of the following health policy provisions states that the producer does NOT have the authority to change the policy or wave any of its provisions? O A Time Limit on Certain Defenses OB. OC OD. Reinstatement Entire Contract Change of Beneficiary MM QUATE Ahiler 372-256-906arrow_forward
- BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student EditionBusinessISBN:9781337407137Author:KellyPublisher:Cengage LearningEssentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...BusinessISBN:9781337386494Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana LoewyPublisher:Cengage LearningAccounting Information Systems (14th Edition)BusinessISBN:9780134474021Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. SteinbartPublisher:PEARSON
- International Business: Competing in the Global M...BusinessISBN:9781259929441Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. HultPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
![Text book image](https://www.bartleby.com/isbn_cover_images/9781337407137/9781337407137_smallCoverImage.gif)
![Text book image](https://www.bartleby.com/isbn_cover_images/9781337386494/9781337386494_smallCoverImage.gif)
![Text book image](https://www.bartleby.com/isbn_cover_images/9780134474021/9780134474021_smallCoverImage.gif)
![Text book image](https://www.bartleby.com/isbn_cover_images/9781947172548/9781947172548_smallCoverImage.gif)
![Text book image](https://www.bartleby.com/isbn_cover_images/9781259929441/9781259929441_smallCoverImage.gif)
![Text book image](https://www.bartleby.com/isbn_cover_images/9780357026595/9780357026595_smallCoverImage.gif)