Several uncertainties and issues of this case come to light when referencing the aforementioned ASC rules. As outlined in ASC 606-10-25-1, the requirements for a contract to exist are clearly met between CoAx and CableCo. ASC 606-10-25-14 and ASC 606-10-25-30 clarify that CoAx owes CableCo…
The case focuses on a sales agreement with multiple deliverables. The critical issue is determining…
(1) Facts: March 2001, L.L. Bean’s corporate counsel mailed Gator a cease and desist letter requesting that Gator stop its pop-up windows from appearing when customers visited their website. Gator refused to change its practices, and instead filed a lawsuit in federal district court in California seeking a declaratory judgment. L.L. Bean filed a motion to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction. In November 2001, the federal district judge granted L.L. Bean’s motion finding that California did not have personal jurisdiction over L.L. Bean. Gator then appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.…
Since 1945, technology has advanced to such a degree that it is possible for sellers to reach consumers in their homes worldwide. The onset of the Internet has created a lapse between the method of doing business in 1945 and the legal system's ability to keep up with technology. The "purposeful availment" requirement for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant ensures that it will not be haled into a jurisdiction solely as a result of a random, fortuitous, or attenuated contact, or by the unilateral activity of another party or a third person. In Quality Design, the court ruled that Tuff Coat's website was a passive one, whereby information about its product was provided, but actual sales were arranged via telephone or mail. The court found personal jurisdiction was lacking.…
BugUSA, Inc. - Case ScenarioThis scenario presents the case of BugUSA, Inc.; as a team, we endeavor to address the legal ramifications of each company's activities. BugUSA, Inc. has legal rights to intellectual property protection, and this paper explores the options available within that realm. WIRETAP, Inc. will face civil liability claims if caught in its underhanded measures, and possibly a civil RICO suit; BugUSA's security guard Walter, however, has also created a case against its own interests. When another company owns the rights to a web domain that suits BugUSA's needs, it faces the challenge of how to acquire the domain with as little hassle and as much protection as possible. A robbed vendor may present new tort liabilities for BugUSA, and we explore potential defenses. Finally, an injured police officer may have further claims against BugUSA in light of the company's manufacturing decisions.…
Issue: The issue is whether the objective circumstances indicate that the parties intended to form a contract…
upheld to prevent the loss of customers, and frivolous lawsuits. This brings me to my…
Court litigations can be costly and Alternative Dispute Resolutions is the best way to go. Solving disputes through the traditional court system is timely and costly. ADR allows a faster and less expensive resolution. The down side to ADR is that it doesn’t allow a legal advisor to dig deep into evidence. There are several types of ADR methods that are available to pursue. The most commonly known are negotiation, mediation, and arbitration which is the most commonly used. The best and most appropriate ADR method, in this case, is mediation. Mediation is the best way to resolve the dispute between Adam and Circuit City. This method is the best way for Circuit City because it allows both parties to settle out of court and avoid negative publicity.…
In the case of Concepcion versus AT&T Mobility LLC held under arbitration in the Supreme Court of the United States a breach of contract regarding sales tax was filed against AT&T. A contract was formed between AT&T and Vincent & Liza Concepcion in an agreement among both parties for the sale and purchase of AT&T cell phone products. After the contract had been formed in February 2008, the Concepcions sued AT&T for damages regarding a purchase of AT&T cell phone products. An overview of the case…
The Virginia courts are highly likely to follow the unconscionability doctrine that has been set out and applied in Jones v. Star Credit Corp. The Jones purchased a freezer unit from Star Credit Corp for $900, three times the retail value of the unit. In this case, the court held that the contract between parties was unconscionable because it violated [HN2] U.C.C. § 2-302 (1964), which is set in place to prevent the oppression and unfair surprise of the consumer. Jones v. Star Credit Corp., 298 N.Y.S.2d 1 (Sup. Ct. 1969)…
If the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis in the case where the members of AOL that got their information mistakenly made public are filing a suit again AOL then the court would not dismiss the suit. AOL is arguing that its forum-selection member agreement states that Virginia courts are the place where member’s disputes will be tried. However, according to the Supreme Court a forum-selection is basically irrelevant if it contravenes with a strong public policy. Stare decisis means that the court must uphold prior decisions. And in the state of California, courts have declared in other cases that the AOL clause contravenes a strong public policy. Therefore, if the court applies stare decisis the suit will not be dismissed and the members of AOL can continue with their case against AOL in California.…
ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. Page 807 512 F.3d 807 (6th Cir. 2008) 85 U.S.P.Q.2d 1481 NCR CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KORALA ASSOCIATES LTD., Defendant-Appellee. No. 06-3685. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Jan. 16, 2008 Argued: Feb. 1, 2007. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton. No. 04-00407-Michael R. Merz, Magistrate Judge. Page 808 [Copyrighted Material Omitted] Page 809 [Copyrighted Material Omitted] Page 810 ARGUED: Paul R. Gupta, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, New York, New York, for Appellant. Paul M. Fakler, Moses & Singer, New York, New York, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Paul R. Gupta, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, New York, New York, John D. Luken, Joshua A. Lorentz, Dinsmore & Shohl, Cincinnati, Ohio, Clifford R. Michel, Mayer Brown, New York, New York, for Appellant. Paul M. Fakler, Moses & Singer, New York, New York, William F. Patry, Thelen, Reid & Priest, New York, New York, for Appellee. Before: KENNEDY, BATCHELDER, and CLAY, Circuit Judges. OPINION Plaintiff NCR Corporation ("NCR") appeals Page 811 the order of the district court[1] compelling NCR and defendant Korala Associates Ltd. ("KAL") to arbitrate NCR's claims against KAL, pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 206[2] part of Chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act, see 9 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., which implements the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, June 10, 1958, 21 U.S.T. 2517, 330 U.N.T.S. 38. I. BACKGROUND NCR is one of the largest providers of Automatic Teller Machines ("ATM") equipment, integrated hardware and software systems, and related maintenance and support services in the world. NCR's ATMs use either the Windows operating system or the OS/2 operating system. NCR installs its APTRA XFS software ("APTRA XFS") on those ATMs using the Windows operating system and its S4i software ("S4i") on those ATMs using the OS/2 operating system. NCR owns a registered…
Appellee (Midwest Distribution, Inc.), who is in the business of setting up cigarette product displays, contracted to hire appellant (Moore) in 2001 to work at its Fort Smith office. Upon accepting employment, appellant signed an employment contract, a “Service work for Hire Agreement” with appellee that contained a non-compete agreement – in which appellant agreed that for one year following the termination of employment, he would not compete or provide services in substantially similar areas. The crux of this non-compete is that it specifically delineates the scope of the non-compete to Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and any other state that appellee has business within. Some time later, appellant terminated his employment with appellee and retained new employment with Jay Godwin in a substantially similar field (a violation of his non-compete with appellee). As a result of the violation of the non-compete agreement, appellee petitioned the trial court for a temporary and permanent injunction and damages. The trial court granted the temporary injunction. Appellant is now appealing this decision.…
Internet America is a wireless ISP (WISP) that operates within the southern United States. Currently we have been expanding the use of WiMAX hardware to provide our customer base a better user experience with fewer issues. Our older hardware has become unusable due to the vendor being restricted from sales in the United States so we made the recent decision to utilize WiMAX hardware developed by an Israeli company. This has brought on the added challenge of maintaining the hardware in the event of a Middle East conflict that potentially could choke off supplies of the equipment in the United States. This ongoing conflict has no foreseeable end in sight so the CEO made the decision to negotiate into the contract with the Israeli company to provide us onsite spares for all major hardware to mitigate the chances of service interruptions to our customers in the event of an escalation of events in that region of the world.…
Prior to 1995, why was America Online (AOL) so successful in the commercial online industry relative to its competitors CompuServe and Prodigy?…