Problems: Chapters 1, 2, amd 4

1. In Gribben v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. , a 2005 decision, the Supreme Court of Indiana ruled on whether a certain legal claim should be recognized as part of Indiana common law. Using an online source, locate and read Gribben. Then prepare a case brief of the sort described in Chapter 1’s appendix on “Reading and Briefing Cases.”
Could not fully understand how to answer this question.

2. Tyson believed that it should not have been liable, that the awards of damages were excessive and unsupported by evidence, and that the inadmissible evidence and improper conduct had tainted the proceedings. What courses of action may Tyson pursue?

Tyson can file an appeal based on the misconduct in the court room and outside of the court room. Tyson could also do a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) or a motion for new trial and remittitur in conjunction with a motion for new trial.

3. Using justice theory, justify a decision to exempt the grandson from your firm’s no drugs policy. Could you make the same decision as a profit maximizer?

Hiring the grandson can be justified by simply giving him a drug test up front and offering employment based on random drug test that he will have to pass in order to continue employment. It would be unethical to not hire the grandson based on knowledge of him being a drug abuser years prior to his application. The company would need to do a background check to find if he was charged with any felonies or crimes in connection with the drug abuse.

4. What do you do if you believe that ethical behavior requires you to maximize Jay-Mart’s profits?

You should still build the building based on the guidelines set by the China legislature. It is unethical to cut corners when the law has already been passed. If the contractor can not handle the job the company should pay them