100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
Previously searched by you
BLW 342 Test 2 Question and answers 100% correct Burns V. Masterbrand Cabinets - correct answer -Reversed and Remanded for further proceedings in favor of Plaintiff Burns. Case involved intrusion upon seclusion Barnes v. McDonalds - correct answer $13.49
Add to cart
BLW 342 Test 2 Question and answers 100% correct Burns V. Masterbrand Cabinets - correct answer -Reversed and Remanded for further proceedings in favor of Plaintiff Burns. Case involved intrusion upon seclusion Barnes v. McDonalds - correct answer
0 view 0 purchase
Course
BLW 342
Institution
BLW 342
BLW 342- Exam 2 (Cases) Question and answers rated A+
US vs. Parks case - correct answer Case about rodent infestation. Mr. Park convicted and fined $500. Court of Appeals reverses the conviction. US Appeals. Supreme Court reverses because Mr. Park had been on notice and should've known there ...
BLW 342 Test 2 Question and answers
100% correct
Burns V. Masterbrand Cabinets - correct answer ✔-Reversed and
Remanded for further proceedings in favor of Plaintiff Burns.
Case involved intrusion upon seclusion
Barnes v. McDonalds - correct answer ✔No breach of contract and District
Court Decision Affirmed in favor of Defendant, McDonald's.
Court found that McDonalds substantially complied with the language of the
Arkansas prize promotion act
Crosswhite v. Urbach - correct answer ✔Summary Judgement granted and
case dismissed in favor of Defendant; Jumpking
Warning on trampoline where sufficient and Crosswhite assumed risk while
jumping
Cook v. Dowing - correct answer ✔Appellant=Licensed dentist. Original court
favored the appellee on basis of "Implied Fitness for a particular purpose", but
appellant court reversed and remanded the decision
Walters V. MIN LTD - correct answer ✔Plaintiff=Gail A Water brought suit to
rescind the contract on grounds of unconscionability. Judgement was to return
annuity with interest to plaintiff and judgement was affirmed.
Patch v. Hillerich and Bradsby Co - correct answer ✔Defendant- Hillerich
and Bradsby Co/Lousiville Slugger motioned for summary judgement
Plaintiff Brandon Patch was killed, Court said you needed strict liability proof
with circumstantial evidence. Therefore the defendants motion for summary
judgement was denied
, Cantu v. Central Ed Agency - correct answer ✔Cantu was hired as a special
ed teacher. She hand delivered her letter of resignation. Superintendent
deposited the acceptance of resignation "mailbox rule". State commissioner
concluded that, school districts acceptance of resignation was effective when
mailed. Affirmed trial court's decision to accept cantus resignation
Anderson v. McOksar Enterprises - correct answer ✔McOskar enterprises
owns Curves. Appellant Tammy Anderson joined the club. McOskar filed for
summary judgement on the grounds that Anderson had released the club from
negligence. The district court agree and Anderson Challenged in appeals. The
appellate court affirmed the district court's decision in favor of defendant
McOskar.
Church & Dwight v. Clorox Company - correct answer ✔Defendant Church v.
Dwight wants Plaintiff Clorox to stop airing a commercial.
Because C&D showed that it will likely succeed on the merits and that it will
suffer irreparable harm if a preliminary injunction is not granted the court
grants C&D's request for a preliminary injunction. Further proceedings
ordered.
Elsroth v. Johnson and Johsnon - correct answer ✔Tylenol purchased at
grocery stored was tampered with resulting in plaintiff Diane Elsroth's death.
Johnson and Johnson filed for summary judgement and motion was granted
and claims dismissed
Engler v. Winfrey - correct answer ✔At issue is whether the Oprah Winfrey
show and one of its guest knowingly and falsely depicted beef as unsafe in
wake of British Mad Cow Disease.
Case was removed to Federal district court by motion
Since the sayings were based on truth the court affirmed the district courts
and affirmed the decision in favor of Winfrey
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Academia199. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $13.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
