Case summary:Company M manufactures and sells over-the-counter pharmaceutical products. Its main brand Z accounts for almost 70 percent sale of the company. The reports about loss of sense of smell by the customer are received by company M. There were four product liability suits registered against company M. Company did not reveal the information received by the report. Person J and other investors filed a suit against M claiming the omission of material information by the company.
To explain:The standard for materiality in the claim filed by the investors.
Case summary:Company M manufactures and sells over-the-counter pharmaceutical products. Its main brand Z accounts for almost 70 percent sale of the company. The reports about loss of sense of smell by the customer are received by company M. There were four product liability suits registered against company M. Company did not reveal the information received by the report. Person J and other investors filed a suit against M claiming the omission of material information by the company.
To explain:The validity of claim made by the person J.
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solutionChapter 28 Solutions
The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases (MindTap Course List)
- 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.arrow_forwardAs part of its business, Kinko’s Graphics Corporation (Kinko’s) copied excerpts from books, compiled them in “packets,” and sold the packets to college students. Kinko’s did this without permission from the owners of the copyrights to the books and without paying copyright fees or royalties. Kinko’s has more than two hundred stores nationwide and reported $15 million in assets and $3 million in profits for 1989. Basic Books, Harper & Row, John Wiley & Sons, and others (plaintiffs) sued Kinko’s for violation of the Copyright Act of 1976. Plaintiffs owned copyrights to the works copied and sold by Kinko’s and derived substantial income from royalties. They argued that Kinko’s had infringed on their copyrights by copying excerpts from their books and selling the copies to college students for profit. Kinko’s admitted that it had copied excerpts without permission and had sold them in packets to students, but it contended that its actions constituted a fair use of the works in…arrow_forwardIn 1992 the state of California charged Sears Auto Centers with overcharging customers for unneeded or unperformed repairs. Sears agreed to a settlement that could cost as much as $20 million. Sears had compensated its salespeople with commissions based on total sales. Following the settlement, Sears dropped the commissions and went to a straight salary. Sears recently indicated that it is planning to reinstate commissions for salespeople in their Auto Centers. It even plans on paying commissions for selling customers brake jobs and wheel alignments. These two products were the core of the 1992 scandal. Sears says that it has taken steps to prevent a recurrence of past problems. In particular, the decision right to recommend repairs is granted to mechanics who are paid a straight salary. Sales consultants are paid commissions for selling repair services but are not authorized to recommend repairs. Under the old system that caused problems, these individuals diagnosed repair…arrow_forward
- The National Safety Council estimates that one quarter of all automobile and truck accidents involve cell phone use or texting. In fatality and injury vehicle accidents, plaintiffs’ attorneys subpoena cell phone records, which often form the basis of compelling liability cases against driver-employees and their employers via vicarious liability. While balancing the privacy rights of the employee, with the business practice of the employer, is it appropriate to ban all cell phone usage while driving on company business. Please fully discuss. HINT: Address the Vicarious Liability & Privacy Rights Issues. Please use the IRAC format Issue: Call of the QuestionRule: Rule of Law to be applied to properly answer the questionAnalysis: Applying the rule of law to the facts of the problem presentedConclusion: Answer to the Issuearrow_forwardthe major federal legislation in Canada that defines illegal practices, including price fixing, bid rigging, price discrimination, predatory pricing, double ticketing, resale price maintenance, bait and switch selling, and pyramid selling occurs when false or deceptive comparisons or distorted claims are made concerning a competitor's product, services, or property comprise principle and standards that guide behaviour in the world of business may be incurred when an unfair and untrue statement is made about a competitor in writing the statement becomes actionable when it is communicated to a third party and can be interpreted as damaging the company the foundation for partnering-style relationship, product, customer, and presentation strategies an attempt to influence the person receiving the "gift"prohibits joining a competing firm for a year after they leave mutual exchange of benefits, as when a firm buys products from its customer the buyer wants to do business with an institution…arrow_forward(a) Under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), what is misleading and deceptive conduct and how does it differ from puffery? (b) Provide two real-world examples of puffery that wouldn't be a breach of ACL:arrow_forward
- 3. Buster operates Buster's Safe Waste, a company that transports toxic chemicals. Buster's company advertises itself as the safest toxic waste transport in the country. They take precautions are over and above all federal and state safety guidelines. In spite of these added safeguards, one of Buster's drivers is involved in an accident while transporting radioactive waste. Can Buster's Toxic Waste be held liable for injuries and harm caused by the radioactive material spilled in the accident?arrow_forward1. The CS Ball Company made a product called the "smoke ball" which claimed to be a cure for influenza and a number of other diseases. The Company published advertisements claiming that it would pay $150.00 to anyone who got sick with influenza after using its product, according to the instructions set out in the advertisement. The $150.00 reward will be paid by CS Ball Company to any person who contracts the increasing epidemic influenza colds, or any disease caused by taking cold, after having used the ball three times daily for two weeks, according to the printed directions supplied with each ball. Showing its sincerity, the company deposited $1M with the Alliance Bank, Regent Street where they can claim their reward. When Mrs. Clark saw the advertisement, she bought a smoke ball and used it three times daily for nearly one month until she contracted the flu. She brought a claimed from the CS Smoke Ball Company, however, the company ignored her two letters. On her third request for…arrow_forwardBUsiness law 9.5 Ethics Case The Lewiston Lodge of Elks sponsored a golf tournament at the Fairlawn Country Club in Poland, Maine. For promotional purposes, Marcel Motors, an automo-bile dealership, agreed to give any golfer who shot a hole-in-one a new Dodge automobile. Fliers advertising the tournament were posted in the Elks Club and sent to potential participants. On the day of the tournament, the new Dodge automobile was parked near the clubhouse, with one of the posters conspicu-ously displayed on the vehicle. Alphee Chenard, Jr., who had seen the promotional literature regarding the hole-in-one offer, registered for the tournament and paid the requisite entrance fee. While playing the 13th hole of the golf course, in the pres-ence of the other members of his foursome, Chenard shot a hole-in-one. When Marcel Motors refused to tender the automobile, Chenard sued for breach of contract. Was the con-tract a bilateral or a unilateral contract? Does Chenard win? Is it ethical for…arrow_forward
- 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?arrow_forwardCorporate Liability of Bp oil about the deepwater horizon oil spill in 2010arrow_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