Category: Business Law

For step 1 of this paper, you were provided four precedent cases to discuss and apply to your dilemma involving the Angelus Funeral Home. These are listed below:
Jespersen v. Harrah’s Operating Co., 444 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2006)
Bostock v. Clayton Cty., Georgia, 723 F.Appx. 964 (11th Cir. 2018)
Bostock v. Clayton Cty., Georgia, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020)
Peltier v. Charter Day Sch., Inc., 37 F.4th 104 (4th Cir. 2022), cert. denied, 143 S. Ct. 2657 (2023)
To earn points for the Step 1 legal analysis of your dilemma, you will need to discuss the four precedent cases provided and explain how they might apply to your dilemma. Jespersen (#1) and Bostock (#3), in particular, should be thoroughly discussed, including how those courts ruled on the sex discrimination theories of (a) unequal burdens; (b) sex stereotyping; and (c) but-for causation.
The cases are attached in PDF’s. The dilemma of the Angelus Funeral Home you apply it to is below:
Angelus Funeral Home Dilemma
Your father, the owner of the Angelus Funeral Home in Los Angeles, California, recently passed away. In his will, your father left you a house in Malibu and his entire interest in the Angelus Funeral Home. For the past twenty years, the funeral home has been managed by a female employee named Rhonda. After speaking with the Human Resources Director of your funeral home, you have discovered that Rhonda has been an excellent employee, but that customers have often complained of Rhonda’s unprofessional appearance. Specifically, numerous complaints have been lodged against Rhonda for being “too casual” in her clothing selection, given that she often presents herself wearing “baggie clothing” that customers find appropriate “only for a pajama party.” These complaints, which have now been showing up on social media with greater frequency, are negatively impacting your funeral home’s business.
To address this issue, you are considering implementing an employee dress code that would require all public-facing funeral home employees to wear professional attire. The dress code you are contemplating would require women, including Rhonda, to wear makeup and to style their hair in a professional manner. The dress code would further require men to wear suits and ties and to keep their hair cut short, specifically, no longer than the top of their shirt collar. It would also prohibit all male employees from wearing makeup.
You are aware that the United States Supreme Court recently weighed in on the issue of dress codes for funeral homes in the case of R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. EEOC (decided as part of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia). Although you don’t know much about the Harris case, you read in the news that a male employee of the funeral home involved in that case successfully sued the funeral home for being fired after expressing his desire to wear dresses and makeup at work. Accordingly, you are concerned that your dress code, while innocent enough, could potentially lead to a costly discrimination lawsuit. Nevertheless, since Rhonda identifies as female, her biological sex, you are not truly concerned about her suing you for discrimination in the event you implement a sex-differentiated dress code for funeral home employees.

CASE 1:
Kennedy vs. Bremerton School A case where the head football coach prayed with his team at the 50-yard line after games He was then later told that he could no longer pray after the games because the school was scared of them getting a lawsuit against them. He refused to stop and was later suspended because he did not comply.
ISSUE: In this case, was Kennedy’s First Amendment right violated by not letting him pray at the 50-yard lin? What I want you to is: write for me about that case in the social side. 1. What are the social implications of this law or ruling? 2-How would society be affected? (3) Give actual examples.)a paper to reed in 2 minutes. I’m doing a presentation with my group. write it in a prober heading and outline. do not use chat GPT

Create a question based on this and then answer it and give a description :
Piercing the corporate veil
When corporate owners use the entity to perpetuate a fraud, circumvent the law, or in some other way accomplish an illegitimate objective, a court will “pierce the corporate veil”, exposing shareholders to personal liability.
How do you feel about the courts piercing the corporate veil of a small family corporation where the officers used the corporate credit card for business expenses as well as home expenses due to lax company procedures?
Also answer these two questions:
Are the courts in the right or wrong for piercing the corporate veil of a small family business who used the corporate credit card on personal expenses?
Should Close Corporations be Expected to Follow the Same Guidelines as a Corporation that is Much Larger?

Jury 1 To- Z (first letter of last name) DUE at 11pm
2020 unread replies.2020 replies.
The Case of the Director Who Wore Too Many Hats
Amanda is one of 5 directors of Abundent Investments Corporation. She is also a majority shareholder holding both common and preferred stock. Her stock with voting rights amounts to 47% of all stock issued with voting rights.
Amanda buys, for $1,500, an option to purchase a tract of real estate called Blackacre, which is next to Abundent’s home office, for $50,000. Amanda forms a new corporation, Commercial Property, Inc., to hold the option. She then has Commercial Property buy Blackacre. As a director of Abundent, Amanda orders Abundent to authorize its real estate agent to negotiate the purchase of the land from Commercial Property for $100,000. After a successful negotiation for the purchase of Blackacre for $100,000, Amanda has Commercial Property sell it to Abundent, and loan the money to Abundent for the purchase price at a 5% interest rate which is 2% below the market rate. Justin, a minority shareholder in Abundent, formally complains to Abundent’s board which takes no action.
The Trial
Justin files a suit against Amanda on Abundent’s behalf seeking to cancel the sale. Amanda asks the Court to dismiss the lawsuit as Justin has no standing to bring the lawsuit.
Arguments At Trial
Amanda’s attorney argues that Blackacre is necessary for Abundent as it will allow them to expand their offices and production plant thus increasing the net worth and potential profits to the shareholders. Further, the Board of Directors of Abundent authorized the purchase which appeared to be in accordance with the Articles of Incorporation.
Justin’s attorney argues that the purchase of Blackacre should have been put to a vote of the shareholders of Abundent as required by Abundent’s Bylaws. Abundent’s Board of Directors failed in its duty to make sure this sale was in the corporation’s best interest.
Questions to Decide
What kind of suit will Justin file and what is its basis?
Who are the Plaintiffs and who are the Defendants? Why?
What are the defenses, if any, of Abundent or Amanda?
Who will win the case and why?

Jury 1 Al – As (first letter of last name) DUE at 11pm
44 unread replies.44 replies.
The Case of the Customer Who Died to Soon

Facts:
On October 26, a Diamond Country Life Insurance agent went to the house of Dedee and Bob Hooper. He persuaded the Hoopers to buy a life insurance policy and accepted a check for $1,600. On his way out the door, he gave the Hoopers a “conditional receipt for medical policy,” dated that day. The form stated that the Hoopers would have a valid life insurance policy with Diamond Country Life, effective October 26, but only when all conditions were met. The most important of these conditions was that the Diamond Country Life home office accept the Hoopers as medical risks after the company scheduled a medical examination. The Hoopers were pleased with the new policy and glad that it was effective that same day.
Bob died in a car accident three weeks later. Diamond Country Life declined the Hoopers as medical risks and refused to issue a policy. Dedee Hooper sued. Diamond Country Life pointed out that medical approval was a condition to being covered. In other words, the company argued that the policy would be effective as of October 26, but only if it later decided to make the policy effective. It had not made that decision as of the date of Bob’s death.
At Trial
Plaintiff argued that the policy was a scam. The so called “conditional receipt for medical policy” is designed to trick customers and then steal their money. The company leads people to believe they are covered as of the day they write the check. But they aren’t covered until much later, when the insurer gets around to deciding the applicant’s medical status.
The company gets the customer’s money right away and gives nothing in exchange. If the company, after taking its time, decides the applicant is not medically fit, it returns the money, having used it for weeks or even months to earn interest. If, on the other hand, the insurance company decides the applicant is a good bet, it then issues the policy effective for weeks or months in the past, when coverage is of no use. No one can die retroactively. The company is being paid for a period during which it had no risk.
Defendant, Diamond Country Life, argued that it would be impracticable for Diamond Country Life to issue life insurance policies without doing a medical check. That is the road to bankruptcy and would mean that no one could obtain this valuable coverage. They further argued that they do a medical inquiry as quickly as possible as it is in their interest to get the policy decided one way or the other.
The policy clearly stated that coverage was effective only when approved by the home office, after all inquiries were made. The Hoopers knew that as well as the agent. If they were covered immediately, why would the company do a medical check?
Questions:
Does the clause making the policy effective only after a medical examination violate public policy? Explain
What other basis for a lawsuit might Dedee have against the insurance company? Explain
Based on your answers to Nos. 1 and 2 who will win this case and why?
Search entries or author

Jury 1 – J – P (first letter of last name) DUE at 11pm
55 unread replies.55 replies.
You’re on the Jury : The Case of the Politically Incorrect Sign
Disturbed by the number and variety of signs that individuals were putting up within its borders, a City passed an ordinance prohibiting all signs on private property except in commercial areas for advertising. Filippo, a homeowner, pasted a sign on the front door of his house containing an American flag with these words underneath the flag: “Down with the Mayor and the City Council – Our rights are being violated”. He then went door to door in his neighborhood passing out copies of this sign and asking his neighbors to display it as well. Filippo was arrested for violating the ordinance.
The Trial
During the trial, a witness for the City described how many signs had appeared in the past on homes and on lawns for commercial home businesses, ruining the appearance of the community. He explained that many other cities and towns had experienced the same problems and that the ordinance was reasonable and the only way to solve the problem. The restriction, he said, was content neutral as it was addressing a societal problem. Filippo testified that the sign he had put up was a small one and that other City residents had raised flags on national holidays and put up signs showing their patriotism. None of these residents had been arrested.
The Arguments at Trial
The City’s attorney argued that a city had the authority to regulate signs within its borders to protect the appearance and value of properties. She further argued that the ordinance did not unduly restrict free speech as there were other ways for residents to express their views: radio, television, and the newspapers. Filippo’s attorney argued that the regulation violated the freedom of speech provisions of the federal constitution, was too broad, too vague, and was unreasonable. He argued that the City could have limited the ordinance by restricting signs over a certain size and in certain locations. He further argued that it was unreasonable to restrict the expression of opinions except for the use of the media.
Discussion Questions to be Answered
Who has the stronger arguments, the City or Filippo? Why?
What are the laws here that are being applied and is their application proper?
If you were the on the jury hearing this case, for whom would you decide? Why?

Jury 1 Ab – Ak (first letter of last name) DUE at 11pm
1919 unread replies.1919 replies.
Case of Global Ethics vs. Global Economy
This is a case that will be tried in the court of Public Opinion.
Gala Shoe Company, a United States corporation, buys clothing assembled by Emerald, LTD., a foreign company that employs children under 12 years of age. These children work nine hour days and for low pay. Emerald’s nation does not enforce its child labor laws limiting workdays to seven hours for children under 12. Many times the children’s income is needed by the family for basic necessities. Emerald and Gala are aware of this.
Human International Politics (HIP), an international political activist organization, discovered Gala’s connection to Emerald, LTD. HIP plans to reveal this information to the press and on social media. Gala hears about this proposed action by HIP. Before HIP can act, Gala terminates its relationship with Emerald. Gala then publicizes this action in its advertising. The company’s sales and profits increase, apparently as a direct result.
Has Gala acted unethically in any way(s)? Explain using one of the ethical philosophies from the readings and facts from the scenario.
From an ethical perspective, is Gala’s conduct in terminating its relationship with Emerald more important than whatever its motive might be? Why or why not?
Search entries or author

I will need you to use the IRAC method to answer all of these and you will also need a biliorgrpahy at the end you can use the textbook or online sources. Here is an outline of the IRAC method :
o I: Issue: The issue is whether ….
o R: Rule: The rule of law (for the issue) is ….
o A: Analysis: The facts of the case are … and apply to the rule of law by …
o C: Conclusion: Therefore, …
1. Joe Andrews delivered his quarter horse I’ll Call Ya (worth about $319,000 in 2010 dollars) to Harold Stone for boarding and stabling. Later he asked Stone if Stone could arrange for the horse’s transportation some distance, and Stone engaged the services of the Allen brothers for that purpose. Andrews did not know the Allens, but Stone had previously done business with them. On the highway the trailer with I’ll Call Ya in it became disengaged from the Allens’ truck and rolled over. The mare, severely injured, “apparently lingered for several hours on the side of the road before she died without veterinary treatment.” The evidence was that the Allens had properly secured the horse’s head at the front of the trailer and used all other equipment that a reasonably prudent person would use to secure and haul the horse; that the ball was the proper size and in good condition; that the ball was used without incident to haul other trailers after the accident; that Ronny Allen was driving at a safe speed and in a safe manner immediately before the accident; that after the accident the sleeve of the trailer hitch was still in the secured position; and that they made a reasonable effort to obtain veterinary treatment for the animal after the accident. The court determined this was a mutual-benefit bailment.
Textbook section 17.5 #1 The issue is whether the Allens are liable for the loss of I’ll Call Ya.
2. Fisher Corporation, a manufacturer of electronic equipment, delivered VCRs to Consolidated Freightways’ warehouse in California for shipment to World Radio Inc., an electronics retailer in Council Bluffs, Iowa. World Radio rejected the shipments as duplicative, and they were returned to Consolidated’s terminal in Sarpy County, Nebraska, pending Fisher’s instructions. The VCRs were loaded onto a trailer; the doors of the trailer were sealed but not padlocked, and the trailer was parked at the south end of the terminal. Padlocks were not used on any trailers so as not to call attention to a trailer containing expensive cargo. The doors of the trailer faced away from the terminal toward a cyclone fence that encircled the yard. Two weeks later, on Sunday, July 15, a supervisor checked the grounds and found nothing amiss. On Tuesday, July 17, Consolidated’s employees discovered a 3 × 5 foot hole had been cut in the fence near the trailer, and half the VCRs were gone; they were never recovered. Consolidated received Fisher’s return authorization after the theft occurred. If Consolidated is considered a carrier, it would be strictly liable for the loss; if it is considered a bailee, it is not liable unless negligent.
Textbook section 17.5 #2A The issue is whether Consolidated is a carrier. Textbook section 17.5 #2B The issue is whether Consolidated is a bailee.
3. Ernest lost both his legs in combat in Vietnam. He has applied for a job with Excelsior Products in the company’s quality control lab. The job requires inspectors to randomly check products coming off the assembly line for defects. Historically, all inspectors have stood two-hour shifts. Ernest proposes to sit in his wheelchair. The company refuses to hire him because it says he will be less efficient. Ernest’s previous employment record shows him to be a diligent, serious worker. Does Ernest have a legal right to be hired?
Textbook section 51.5 #3 The issue is whther Ernest has a legal right to be hired.
4. Charlie Goodfellow works for Yum-burger and has always commanded respect at the local franchise for being the fastest server. One day, he undergoes a profound religious experience, converts to Sikhism, and changes his name to Sanjay Singh. The tenets of his religion require him to wear a beard and a turban. He lets his beard grow, puts on a turban, and his fellow workers tease him. When a regional vice president sees that Sanjay is not wearing the prescribed Yum-Burger uniform, he fires him.
Textbook section 51.5 #4 The issue is whether Goodfellow has any legal remedies following being fired.

Jury 1 Cr – I (first letter of last name) DUE at 11pm
99 unread replies.99 replies.
Tilt’s and ADR
Tilt’s Restaurant used an alternative dispute resolution program. Employees of Tilt’s had to sign an “agreement to arbitrate employment-related disputes” to be eligible for raises, transfers, and promotions. Under the agreement, both Tilt’s and the employee agreed to resolve all disputes arising out of employment, including “any claim of discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation, or wrongful discharge, whether arising under federal or state law,” through arbitration.
In a separate policy document not shared with employees until after they had signed the agreement, Tilt’s set forth the rules and procedures of its arbitration program:
The employee had to provide notice of the specifics of the claim, but Tilt’s did not need to file any type of response to these specifics or notify the employee of what kinds of defenses the company planned to raise.
Only the employee had to provide a list of all facts or witnesses and a brief summary of the facts known to each.
While the employee and Tilt’s could each choose an arbitrator from a list, and the two arbitrators chosen would then select a third to create the arbitration panel that would hear the dispute, Tilt’s alone selected the arbitrators that were put on the list.
Only Tilt’s had the right to widen the scope of arbitration to include award any matter, whereas the employee was limited to the matters raised in his or her notice.
Only Tilt’s had the right to record the arbitration.
Only Tilt’s could cancel the agreement to arbitrate or change the arbitration rules.
Erin had worked as a bartender at the Tilt’s restaurant for about five years before Tilt’s adopted its arbitration policy. Erin was given a copy of the agreement to arbitrate to review for five days and then sign. Approximately two years later, a Tilt’s official grabbed and slapped her buttocks. After appealing to her manager for help and being told to “let it go,” she quit her job. When she threatened to file a lawsuit for sexual harassment, Tilt’s filed an action in federal district court to compel arbitration of Erin’s claims.
Should Erin be forced to settle her claim through arbitration? Why?
Assume your company’s arbitration policy was exactly like Tilt’s’. Name one aspect would you retain, and which one might you change? Why? Be specific.
It is acceptable to use the Power Point slides for the required text reference.
In October, 2019, California companies can no longer require employees to sign an agreement forcing harassment, discrimination and wage claims into arbitration as a condition of employment instead of being able to sue.
California’s legislation was careful not to conflict with the Federal Arbitration Act and U.S. Supreme Court case law that allows companies to enforce mandatory arbitration agreements. The new state law says it’s illegal to require mandatory arbitration as a condition for employment, but doesn’t invalidate existing agreements. It also protects employees from retaliation and allows them to go to the state Labor Commissioner’s Office.

Jury 1 R – Th (first letter of last name) DUE at 11pm
55 unread replies.55 replies.
The Case of the Customer Who Died to Soon

Facts:
On October 26, a Topaz Country Life Insurance agent went to the house of Cynthia and Stan Williams. He persuaded the Williams to buy a life insurance policy and accepted a check for $1,600. On his way out the door, he gave the Williams a “conditional receipt for medical policy,” dated that day. The form stated that the Williams would have a valid life insurance policy with Topaz Country Life, effective October 26, but only when all conditions were met. The most important of these conditions was that the Topaz Country Life home office accept the Williams as medical risks after the company scheduled a medical examination. The Williams were pleased with the new policy and glad that it was effective that same day.
Stan died in a car accident three weeks later. Topaz Country Life declined the Williams as medical risks and refused to issue a policy. Cynthia Williams sued. Topaz Country Life pointed out that medical approval was a condition to being covered. In other words, the company argued that the policy would be effective as of October 26, but only if it later decided to make the policy effective. It had not made that decision as of the date of Stan’s death.
At Trial
Plaintiff argued that the policy was a scam. The so called “conditional receipt for medical policy” is designed to trick customers and then steal their money. The company leads people to believe they are covered as of the day they write the check. But they aren’t covered until much later, when the insurer gets around to deciding the applicant’s medical status.
The company gets the customer’s money right away and gives nothing in exchange. If the company, after taking its time, decides the applicant is not medically fit, it returns the money, having used it for weeks or even months to earn interest. If, on the other hand, the insurance company decides the applicant is a good bet, it then issues the policy effective for weeks or months in the past, when coverage is of no use. No one can die retroactively. The company is being paid for a period during which it had no risk.
Defendant, Topaz Country Life, argued that it would be impracticable for Topaz Country Life to issue life insurance policies without doing a medical check. That is the road to bankruptcy and would mean that no one could obtain this valuable coverage. They further argued that they do a medical inquiry as quickly as possible as it is in their interest to get the policy decided one way or the other.
The policy clearly stated that coverage was effective only when approved by the home office, after all inquiries were made. The Williams knew that as well as the agent. If they were covered immediately, why would the company do a medical check?
Questions:
Does the clause making the policy effective only after a medical examination violate public policy? Explain
What other basis for a lawsuit might Cynthia have against the insurance company? Explain
Based on your answers to Nos. 1 and 2 who will win this case and why?