JimmyCorps places several Facebook ads claiming that his magic tonic protects consumers from coronavirus. Harvey places an order for 50 gallons of the magic tonic to protect himself and his family. Meanwhile, the New York Attorney General commences prosecution of JimmyCorps for fraud—his magic tonic is simply a gallon of bleach, and consumers who have purchased it have become gravely ill or died. Still, JimmyCorps sues Harvey when Harvey refuses to pay for the 50 gallons of tonic he ordered. Can a judge force Harvey to pay JimmyCorps? Why or why not?   Note:- Do not provide handwritten solution. Maintain accuracy and quality in your answer. Take care of plagiarism. Answer completely. You will get up vote for sure.

Anthem, one of the largest healthcare insurers in the United States, implemented an“avoidable ER” policy to help manage the care of its enrollees. The policy stated thatAnthem would not pay for emergency room visits if the company determined that the visitwas not necessary. The policy, which was instituted in six states beginning in 2015, wasmeant to encourage patients to seek care in appropriate settings. However, providers feelthat this policy might cause patients to avoid emergency treatment, even when it isnecessary. In response to customer and provider complaints, Anthem created severalexceptions: Claims will be covered if a healthcare provider tells a patient to go to theemergency room, if the patient is under 15 years of age, if the patient is outside his or her state of residence, and if the patient had a CT scan or MRI or underwent surgery. Still,providers are unhappy with the policy (Livingston 2018).1-Why did Anthem implement this policy?

Suture Express was a new upstart specializing in the medical supply network by selling only sutures. Owens & Minor was a medical supply distributor that carried all types of medical supplies, including sutures. Owens & Minor began bundling provisions that required its customers to pay a premium for all medical products unless the customer agreed to purchase its sutures. Suture Express brought suit alleging a loss to Owens & Minor through anticompetitive practices. Is this a tying situation that violates federal antitrust laws? Why or why not?

Nevada passes a statute that any 18-wheel truck passing through Nevada must meet a Clean Fuel Fleet Exhaust Emission Standard of no more than 2.8 nitrous oxide (NOx). The federal statute requirement for such trucks is no more than 3.8 NOx. Carlton is driving his 18-wheeler cross-country to deliver a load and stops at a Nevada weigh station. The weigh station officer inspects Carlton’s documents, notes that Carlton’s truck has a 3.4 NOx emission level, and issues a citation. On what grounds might Carlton fight this citation?

Brian Cleary and Rita Burke filed a suit against cigarette maker Philip Morris USA, Inc., seeking class-action status for a claim of deceptive advertising. Cleary and Burke claimed that “light” cigarettes, such as Marlboro Lights, were advertised as safer than regular cigarettes, even though the health effects are the same. They contended that the tobacco companies concealed the true nature of light cigarettes. Philip Morris correctly claimed that it was authorized by the government to advertise cigarettes, including light cigarettes. Assuming that is true, should the plaintiffs still be able to bring a deceptive advertising claim against the tobacco company? Why or why not?

In the case, the Supreme Court held the content of Westboro's signs related to private matters.  True  False

Over the years, the Red Cross has been guided in its use of donations by honoring donor intent. This policy helped the organization deal with a major ethical challenge after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Red Cross received more than $1 billion in donations and initially diverted some money to ancillary operations, such as creating a strategic blood reserve. After donors objected, however, the organization reversed its decision and – honoring donor intent – used the contributions to directly benefit people affected by the tragedy. Should the American Red Cross have reversed its initial decision to divert some of the money donated for September 11 relief efforts to pressing but ancillary operations? Support your chosen position.

ANTHEM’S AVOIDABLE EMERGENCY ROOM POLICYAnthem, one of the largest healthcare insurers in the United States, implemented an“avoidable ER” policy to help manage the care of its enrollees. The policy stated thatAnthem would not pay for emergency room visits if the company determined that the visitwas not necessary. The policy, which was instituted in six states beginning in 2015, wasmeant to encourage patients to seek care in appropriate settings. However, providers feelthat this policy might cause patients to avoid emergency treatment, even when it isnecessary. In response to customer and provider complaints, Anthem created severalexceptions: Claims will be covered if a healthcare provider tells a patient to go to theemergency room, if the patient is under 15 years of age, if the patient is outside his or her state of residence, and if the patient had a CT scan or MRI or underwent surgery. Still,providers are unhappy with the policy (Livingston 2018). What other solutions could be used…

Explain the factors weighed by courts to determine whether the fair-use doctrine provides a valid defense to a claim of copyright infringement.   Describe the nature and classifications of property. Explain the difference between real property, personal property, and intellectual property. Which one would you rather own? Explain why. Provide an example of each.

KSR designs and manufactures auto parts and sells them to auto manufacturers (not consumers). KSR developed a pedal device for Ford vehicles and also received a patent on the pedal device. KSR also sold products to General Motors (GM), and, in order to make the pedal device compatible for GM cars, KSR added an electronic throttle control to the pedal device. Teleflex claimed to have a patent for the pedal device that could be connected to such a throttle and, therefore, sued KSR for patent infringement. KSR defended on the basis that the device produced for GM was simply a combination of two existing products and was not patentable.