Case Laws Regarding Partnerships, Shareholders, Agents, and Discrimination in Business, Quizzes of Business and Labour Law

Download Case Laws Regarding Partnerships, Shareholders, Agents, and Discrimination in Business and more Quizzes Business and Labour Law in PDF only on Docsity! TERM 1 Clark v. Lubritz (5 doctors incorporate improperly & do not share equally w/ one Dr.) DEFINITION 1 Court ruled that the default form of organization is a partnership. There was a breach of agreement and fiduciary policy, so the partners were liable. TERM 2 Brown v. Swett & Crawford (Brown makes salary & commission @ firm) DEFINITION 2 Court ruled that a compensation package is not enough to create a partnership TERM 3 Northampton Valley Constructors v. Horne Lang LP (breach of contract 1 gen, 18 limited partners) DEFINITION 3 Court ruled that, because the limited partners did not participate in management, they were not general partners and could not be sued. TERM 4 Schlensky v. Wrigley (shareholders sue Wrigley field board for not installing lights) DEFINITION 4 Shareholders must prove that the board acted fraudulently or arbitrarily to win. Court ruled in favor of the board, claiming the board had two solid reasons not to install lights. TERM 5 Disney Cases (Ovitz hired as President w/ 5 yr contract. Board allows leave after 1 yr) DEFINITION 5 Court ruled in favor of the board, claiming that it had legitimate business options and acted reasonably. TERM 6 Watson v. Schmidt (agent has authority to sell 1 horse but sells a different one for higher val.) DEFINITION 6 Court ruled that because the principal waited so long (3 months after the sale), he could not receive the horse back and the agent had legitimate agency power under ratification by implication. TERM 7 Rosen v. DePorter (R buys African tour from D who does not disclose they are agent for WT) DEFINITION 7 Court ruled that Rosen CAN sue DePorter because the principal in the transaction is undisclosed. Rosen did not know that DePorter was the principal for World Trek. TERM 8 Sutton et. al. v. United Airlines (twins with glasses applied for pilot job & were denied) DEFINITION 8 Court ruled that the twins were not disabled under ADA, because glasses gave them normal vision. TERM 9 Murphy v. UPS (worker fired after failing DOT blood test) DEFINITION 9 Court ruled that high blood pressure is not a disability under the ADA, because medication controlled/corrected the condition. TERM 10 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (wman denied partner bc needed makeup and people skills) DEFINITION 10 Court ruled that the employer must show a legitimate reason, standing alone, would have resulted in the same decision--firm loses under Title VII