Refer To Case 20-3: Case Study
Refer to Case 20-3. State Issues, decision, and reason/support for this case. Follow format in syllabus. 2pts
ISSUE: Under what principle might Smart Inventions be liable for Nokees fraud? Is Smart Inventions liable in his case?
DECISION: Under the respondeat superior doctrine, corporations are liable for crimes committed by its agents that are employed with the corporation. Smart Inventions is only liable under the circumstances that Nokee discussed the agreement under the scope of his employment.
REASON/SUPPORT: The respondeat superior doctrine is called upon because Nokees lied about the financial condition of the corporation and Nokee had the intent to further his business. Proof of him wanted to further his business is when he knowingly
lied about the condition of the corporation. Nokees continued concealment of the tap light was an act of an officer of Smart Inventions within the scope of his employment. Considering the dispute or agreement was about ownership over the company Smart Inventions, Nokees is not liable for fraud. 2) Business Judgment Rule
Define it. Discuss the significance of this rule. 2pts
The business judgement rule makes business directors of a corporation immune from liability to the corporation for loss incurred in corporation transactions that are within their power to make when evidence shows that the executed transactions are in good faith. Good faith is a form of honesty in business. This rule is significant because it protects Business directors from getting sued because of a bad decision that they made for the company. If a plaintiff were to sue a person from a corporation because he failed his duty of car or good faith then the business judgement rule could protect the defendant. The plaintiff must show the judge that the business judgement rule does not apply to the case in order to bring a case against the defendant.
ISSUE: Under what principle might Smart Inventions be liable for Nokees fraud? Is Smart Inventions liable in his case?
DECISION: Under the respondeat superior doctrine, corporations are liable for crimes committed by its agents that are employed with the corporation. Smart Inventions is only liable under the circumstances that Nokee discussed the agreement under the scope of his employment.
REASON/SUPPORT: The respondeat superior doctrine is called upon because Nokees lied about the financial condition of the corporation and Nokee had the intent to further his business. Proof of him wanted to further his business is when he knowingly
lied about the condition of the corporation. Nokees continued concealment of the tap light was an act of an officer of Smart Inventions within the scope of his employment. Considering the dispute or agreement was about ownership over the company Smart Inventions, Nokees is not liable for fraud. 2) Business Judgment Rule
Define it. Discuss the significance of this rule. 2pts
The business judgement rule makes business directors of a corporation immune from liability to the corporation for loss incurred in corporation transactions that are within their power to make when evidence shows that the executed transactions are in good faith. Good faith is a form of honesty in business. This rule is significant because it protects Business directors from getting sued because of a bad decision that they made for the company. If a plaintiff were to sue a person from a corporation because he failed his duty of car or good faith then the business judgement rule could protect the defendant. The plaintiff must show the judge that the business judgement rule does not apply to the case in order to bring a case against the defendant.