- Table of Contents
- Week 1
- Week 1 Discussion
Week 1 Discussion
Discussion
Before beginning work on this week’s discussion forum, please review the link “Doing Discussion Questions Right,” the expanded grading rubric for the forum, and any specific instructions for this week’s topic.
By the due date assigned, submit your answers for two scenarios to this Discussion Area. Start reviewing and responding to your classmates as early in the week as possible. You should review and critique the work of other students as outlined in the expanded rubric by the due date assigned.
Select two of the scenarios listed below and explain the best solution for each. Include comments related to any ethical issues that arise. You should locate at least one scholarly source from the SUO Library or one case that has been decided or is currently pending to support your answer.
Scenario 1: Jurisdiction and Choice of Law.
Three friends from Florida were going cross-country skiing in Michigan. Shirley, the first skier came to a stop sign on the trail, waved at her companions and stopped. Jackie, the second to approach, was going too fast to stop, veered to the left and tripped over a log. Jane, the third skier was going so fast she clipped Shirley’s skis, fell over Jackie and slammed into a tree. Jane broke bones in her right arm and leg, which required surgery to repair the injuries. Jane filed a lawsuit against Shirley and Jackie in a trial court in Florida, claiming that each of her friends was liable to her for their negligent skiing. A Michigan statute specifically stated that snow skiers assumed the risks associated with skiing. Florida law did not contain an assumption of the risk rule regarding skiing. The two defendants made a motion for summary judgment.
- Does Michigan or Florida law apply to this case? Explain
Scenario 2: Constitution
Paul Mitchell, a student at Raleigh Egypt Middle School learned he received a “D” in his history class, which meant he would have to attend summer school. Mitchell posted on Facebook that his history teacher and the principal should be shot. Mitchell also posted a cartoon that showed the teacher’s head on a body that had been mutilated. Mitchell’s mother instructed her son to remove the post, but he refused. The principal suspended Mitchell for the last month of school and contacted the police.
- Determine whether Mitchell’s statement and resulting actions by the school violate the First Amendment. Provide support your answer.
Scenario 3: Minimum Contacts
All Hands Gloves, a company in Minnesota, sold three shipping containers of latex gloves to MedSpa, a company based in Tennessee. When MedSpa failed to pay the $42,120 owed on the gloves, All Hands filed suit in a Minnesota court and obtained a judgment against MedSpa. MedSpa argued that it did not have minimum contacts with Minnesota because it was incorporated in Tennessee. Therefore, the Minnesota judgment based on personal jurisdiction was invalid.
- Was this argument alone sufficient to prevent the Minnesota judgment from being collected against MedSpa? Make arguments for both parties, select a winner and support your answer.
Scenario 4: Alternative Dispute Resolution1
Frances, a 50-year-old woman employed by Accent Manufacturing, was presented with a mandatory arbitration agreement to sign three years after starting work. When Frances was terminated, she filed a claim with the EEOC under the Age Discrimination Employment Act. Accent Manufacturing filed to dismiss because of the arbitration agreement.
- Present arguments for both sides, determine which party should win and support your answer.
Note: To learn how to properly cite a court case, click HERE.
