Floors N More, Inc.: Legal Case Study

1) Floors n' More, Inc., hires Gordon to renovate Floors n' Mores showroom. Gordon submits plans that Floors n' More approves. Gordon completes the major reconstruction, paints the interior, and buys the fixtures and furnishings. Floors n' More rejects some of these items because they do not match the plans, and subsequently refuses to allow Gordon to finish the work or to collect payment. Could Gordon sue successfully for payment for the entire contract?

I believe that Gordon would be able to successfully sue for payment of the contract, but not to the entirety of it. The reasoning for this is that Gordon's plans with Floors n' More Inc. were submitted to the company, and then approved afterwards. By doing so, this was made into an
express oral contract between the two, making it one that will have to be paid out for the work that is being done. While the answer is yes, it is not entirely. And what I mean by that is that Gordon did in fact go against the plan with choices of items that were not matching. With this being the case, Gordon trying to sue will result in only partial gain of the contract's worth, due to him not following out the plan to the company's desires and specifications. He will be paid for what he did correctly in the deal. So as a whole, no, Gordon will not be able to receive the entire contract's worth by suing.

2) In a lawsuit between Cloud Computing Corporation and Digital Enterprises, Inc., the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis. What is this doctrine? What does this doctrine have to do with the American legal system?

The doctrine of stare decisis is the notion that court cases that have happened in the past must be recognized as precedents, which means they will be used as a reference point in a sense, according to case law. This doctrine, in correlation with the American legal system, is the policy of courts to stand by precedents. A case is important based on what it will decide as an outcome. This is not the main way of going about cases in the modern day legal system, but it is still used. More commonly in legal systems, it is more likely that the idea of jurisprudence would be used.

3) Explain the difference between common law and statutory law. How are they related?

Common law, as opposed to statutory law, is based on precedent, whereas statutory law is the written law that is decided by government agencies, as well as the legislature.
Common laws are created through judges' decisions in cases. They use the decisions of previous cases to help weigh their own decisions, unless there have been no prior cases that fit with the one in court, in which case the decision made for that case may well become the new common law. Statutory laws are issued by a government in order to contort to reasons of the people, the main reasons being citizen's needs, to resolve issues that have remained present in which a court may be referencing the government and characterizing or formalizing preexisting laws in the justice system. However, the two are related in a sense that they are both commonly used in judicial systems to draw verdicts for
cases.

4) The McNaughton Rule focuses on whether a criminal defendant knew the nature of the crime or understood right from wrong at the time it was committed. The defendant must meet one of the two distinct criteria. Some courts differ as to whether the "wrong" in question refers to moral or legal wrong (or both). What element of a criminal act does this rule negate?

The McNaughton Rule negates(nullifies) 1) that an individual pertains the capacity to know wrong from right, and 2) knowing that something is against the law or not when it is being done, or just not knowing that what they were doing was wrong. Using a direct quote from an online source as a resource for my answer(http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/M/MNaghtenRules.aspx)," I would reaffirm that one could be exempt if it can be established that one is labelled "insane" by going through the right wrong test to determine if one did not know the nature of the act in which they were committing or if known, that one did not have the knowledge to believe that the act in which they were committing, was wrong.

5) Tech Performance, Inc., completes programming and other tech services for Uno IT Products Corporation. When Uno's computer system crashes, it loses $500,000 worth of business and pays $100,000 to have the system reprogrammed. Uno IT announces to the media that the crash was due to Tech Performance's incompetence and files a complaint in a federal court against the firm. What are Tech Performance's options in response to this complaint?

In terms of this complaint, Tech Performance can go about this in several ways. Firstly, they could either go public and make a statement that either admits to this being their fault, or they can deny it and set up a defense for their case to present. In this defense, they should address the issue and what went wrong, as well as provide and state facts that would deduce that it was not in fact the company's fault(making them liable). Another way about this would be making a counter-claim that would flip the roles and claim that Uno's was at fault, and not Tech Performance. With this method, they could also seek reparations from Uno's to repay them for what the issue going public would have done to their reputation as a whole, including the business side of things(because businesses tend to be quite heavily effected when brought up in the news in a negative way). A third way about handling this issue, and responding to the complaint, they could motion in court to dismiss the case all together. With this method, it can either end quickly, and both sides go away with nothing, or, if it is not dismissed, then the process above will take place, and Tech Performance will have to file an answer. Also, if it does get passed, and the case is dismissed, Uno's will also be given a duration of time in which they may seek out an amended complaint, if they feel as if they have been treated unjust in this case.

6) Dixie, a driver for Express Delivery Company, leaves the truck's motor running in neutral and carelessly forgets to set the parking brake while she makes a delivery. The truck rolls and crashes into a nearby gas station pump, igniting a fire that spreads quickly to a construction site a block away. A burned wall collapses onto a crane, which falls on Fazio, a bystander, and injures him. What must Fazio show to recover damages from Express Delivery?

In order to recover damages from Express Delivery, Fazio must show that Dixie was being negligent, by being careless and forgetting to set the parking brake.
As well as doing this, Fazio must show that Dixie breached a duty of care, on behalf of his company, Express Delivery. It must be connected and made clear that through Dixie's negligence, this exact chain of events occurred and led to what became a crane falling onto Fazio and injuring him. In other words, what I wrote means that it needs to show a foreseeable result of Dixie's careless behavior, that led to the injury, and not anything else. "This is the proximate, or legal cause, which exists when the connection between an act and an injury is strong enough to justify imposing liability(direct quote from
book)."

7) Jim operates Jim's Fruits & Vegetables, a small market stocked entirely with produce grown on his adjacent farm. Under what clause of the Constitution can the federal government regulate Jim's activities? What is Jim's best argument against federal regulation of his farm and business?

Jim's activities can be regulated by the federal government through the commerce clause of the Constitution. This clause states that Congress can regulate any activity that occurs interstate or intrastate, that will have an effect on the interstate commerce. Typically, it would be acceptable claim because it is generally perceived that the buying and selling of goods from one's farm would be considered commerce that occurred interstate. However, Jim's best argument against federal regulation of his farm and business would be that this does not affect interstate commerce, because he is growing the produce himself, on his own farm, and then selling them in a small market, which we can safely assume is being located in the local area. Thus, by doing so, it could be argued that it does not play a role in interstate commerce. Jim would be at the mercy of the court, because this argument wouldn't help much, because the selling aspect would inhibit commerce taking place, so he wouldn't have any real chance in winning the case.