MGMT 520 Week 8 Final Exam Set 2

MGMT 520 Week 8 Final Exam Set 2

To Download This Material Click HERE: DOWNLOAD

Or Copy The Link:  http://www.fortuneofstudents.com/mgmt-520-week-8-final-exam-set-2/

Product Description

TCO D Short Answer Question and Facts for Page 1 Questions:

A well known pharmaceutical company, Robins & Robins, is working through a public scandal. Three popular medications that they sell over the counter have been determined to be tainted with small particles of plastic explosive. The plastic explosives came from a Robins & Robins supplier named Casings, Inc., that supplies the capsule casings for the medication pills. Casings, Inc., also sells shell casings for ammunition. Over $8 million in inventory is impacted. The inventory is located throughout the Western United States, and it is possible that it has also made its way into parts of Canada.

Last fall, the FDA had promulgated an administrative proposed rule that would have required all pharmaceutical companies that sold over-the-counter medications to incorporate a special tracking bar code (i.e., UPC bars) on their packaging to ensure that recalls could be done with very little trouble. The bar codes cost about 35 cents per package.

Robins & Robins lobbied hard against this rule and managed to get it stopped in the public comments period. They utilized multiple arguments, including the cost (which would be passed on to consumers). They also raised “privacy” concerns, which they discussed simply to get public interest groups upset. (One of the drugs impacted is used for assisting with alcoholism treatment – specifically for withdrawal symptoms – and many alcoholics were afraid their use of the drug could be tracked back to them.) Robins & Robins argued that people would be concerned about purchasing the medication with a tracking mechanism included with the packaging and managed to get enough public interest groups against the rule. The FDA decided not to impose the rule.

Robins & Robins’ contract with Casings, Inc., states, in section 14 B.2.a., “The remedy for defects in supplies shall be limited to the cost of the parts supplied.” Casings, Inc., had negotiated that clause into the contract after a lawsuit from a person who was shot by a gun resulted in a partial judgment against Casings for contributory negligence.

Robins & Robins sues Casings, Inc., for indemnification from suits by injured victims from the medication, for the cost of the capsule shells, for attorney’s fees, and for punitive damages. List any defenses Casings, Inc., would have under contract theory ONLY. (short answer question)

Advertisements

MGMT 520 Week 8 Final Exam Set 1

MGMT 520 Week 8 Final Exam Set 1

To Download This Material Click HERE: DOWNLOAD

Or Copy The Link:  http://www.fortuneofstudents.com/mgmt-520-week-8-final-exam-set-1/

Product Description

  1. TCO D Short Answer Question and Facts for Page 1 Questions:

A well known pharmaceutical company, Robins & Robins, is working through a public scandal. Three popular medications that they sell over the counter have been determined to be tainted with small particles of plastic explosive. The plastic explosives came from a Robins & Robins supplier named Casings, Inc., that supplies the capsule casings for the medication pills. Casings, Inc., also sells shell casings for ammunition. Over $8 million in inventory is impacted. The inventory is located throughout the Western United States, and it is possible that it has also made its way into parts of Canada.

Last fall, the FDA had promulgated an administrative proposed rule that would have required all pharmaceutical companies that sold over-the-counter medications to incorporate a special tracking bar code (i.e., UPC bars) on their packaging to ensure that recalls could be done with very little trouble. The bar codes cost about 35 cents per package.

Robins & Robins lobbied hard against this rule and managed to get it stopped in the public comments period. They utilized multiple arguments, including the cost (which would be passed on to consumers). They also raised “privacy” concerns, which they discussed simply to get public interest groups upset. (One of the drugs impacted is used for assisting with alcoholism treatment – specifically for withdrawal symptoms – and many alcoholics were afraid their use of the drug could be tracked back to them.) Robins & Robins argued that people would be concerned about purchasing the medication with a tracking mechanism included with the packaging and managed to get enough public interest groups against the rule. The FDA decided not to impose the rule.

Robins & Robins’ contract with Casings, Inc., states, in section 14 B.2.a., “The remedy for defects in supplies shall be limited to the cost of the parts supplied.” Casings, Inc., had negotiated that clause into the contract after a lawsuit from a person who was shot by a gun resulted in a partial judgment against Casings for contributory negligence.

List any bases Robins & Robins could sue Casings, Inc., under contract theory ONLY for the damages caused by the explosives in their drugs, over and above the cost of the capsule shells. (short answer question) (Points: 15)

  1. TCO B. The FDA discovers that, during the public comment process, Robins & Robins bribed one of the members of the administrative panel that decided to pull the rule from consideration. The member of the panel was removed and is being charged criminally. As a result, the FDA immediately implements an emergency order that puts into effect the “tracking bar” requirement and makes the rule retroactive, but only to Robins & Robins. Provide two arguments Robins & Robins can make to have the rule determined to be invalid under the Administrative Procedures Act. Explain your answer. (Points: 30)
  2. TCO C. Robins & Robins immediately issued a massive recall for the tainted medication upon learning of the situation. Despite the recall, 1,400 children and 350 adults have been hospitalized after becoming very ill upon taking the tainted medication. Each of them had failed to note the recall after having already purchased the medication. It is quickly determined that they will need liver transplants and many of them are on a waiting list. During the wait, to date, 12 children have died. Their families are considering suing for both 402A and negligence. The attorneys stated that but for the lobbying efforts, the recall process would have been automated and the people would not have gotten sick or died.

You are an employee with the FDA. You are drafting a memo to your boss analyzing the FDA’s liability and explaining why the FDA did the right thing in deciding not to pass the original tracking bar (UPC) rule. You are specifically being told to respond to the issue of the deaths and illnesses. What would you write? Include (and fully explain) any defenses you feel that the FDA could use against any negligence or public relation cases. Explain what liability (if any) the FDA could have to the victims and their families. (Points: 30)

  1. TCO A. It is discovered that Robins & Robins knew about the tainted medication 2 months earlier than they announced the recall. They hid it and, in fact, sent out contract buyers to try to buy up all of the medication off the shelves. Their “fake” recall failed. Using the Blanchard and Peale method of analyzing ethical dilemmas, analyze the ethical dilemma faced by the CEO of Robins & Robins for the fact that they saved 35 cents/package and are now in the middle of a major, life-threatening recall. Analyze their “fake” recall as well. Show all of the steps of the model and give a recommendation to the CEO of what to do now that the deaths are escalating. What is the “right” thing for the CEO to do in this case? (Points: 30)
  2. TCO I. A Canadian citizen whose child died from the medication sues the FDA for allowing the sale of dangerous medication in Canada. The lawsuit is filed in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Is this the proper court to hear this case? Why or why not? (short answer question) (Points: 15)

Question 2 – 2 essays, 30 points each.

  1. TCO E. Anna and Lisa both sue Pastor Forester and the school under Title VII. Analyze their Title VII lawsuit against the school and Pastor Forester. Explain whether you feel that the two injured teachers have cases for recovery (describe the theories and whether you feel they will be successful). Discuss whether the school being a religious, private school has any bearing on liability or protection from liability. Include all defenses available to the school and Pastor Forester. (Points: 30)
  2. TCO H and E. In the discovery portion of the case, it is determined that Pastor Forester is really not a pastor. His real name is Jerry Birches, a parolee with convictions for child molestation. His parole agreement prohibits him being closer than 1,000 feet to any school. In order to cut costs, the school had stopped doing background checks on new employees, and this slipped through the cracks. The president of the board of directors immediately fires Pastor “Jerry Birches” Forester and notifies his parole officer of the violations. Pastor Forester claims the board knew about his background because one member of the board (his aunt Theresa) knew the truth. He claims her knowledge should be imputed to the entire board of directors. He then sues the school for firing him for being a convicted felon. He claims that is illegal, and he publicly attacks the church for their “less-than-Christian” behavior in firing him.

The board immediately convenes to discuss “damage control.” It knows you took a law and ethics course recently and asks you to write a news release to the local newspaper explaining the situation. Using ethical and legal considerations (including the fact you are in the middle of multiple lawsuits), write the brief news release. Then, explain why you wrote it the way you did. (Points: 30) –

Exact – XX

Page 3 – Two essays at 30 points each.

  1. TCO F. Ellen DeGeneres sues Clean Clothes for the use of a look-alike model for the slacks advertisement. She includes Lanham Act, misappropriation, and “right of publicity” claims in her complaint. Clean Clothes countersues for product disparagement. Joseph A. Bank (JOSB) sues Ellen for impacting their men’s clothing sales with her unsolicited comment. What facts will Ellen use to support her cases, and why will those support her cases? What defenses will Ellen have against Clean Clothes’s and JOSB’s countersuits? Do you think any of the three will win their cases? Why or why not? (Points: 30)
  2. 2. TCO G. It is discovered that 2 weeks before the Ellen show, she had sold $2 million in JOSB stock (at a gain of about $2,200). The morning after her show, Ellen sold JOSB short (which means she was betting the stock price would go down), and she made another $210,000 in the next week on that trade. The swing in the price was not directly tied to her comments but was suspected to be a result of a recall JOSB made on their entire line of men’s black and brown dress slacks when it was discovered that they had been sewn together with white thread. Ellen’s previous trading activity shows that she made it a normal practice to “vigorously trade” the stock of any company with which she did business. A review of her trading activity for the past year showed that she had bought and sold JOSB stock 25 different times, including short sales like this one. Her overall trading for JOSB stock for the last 12 months was a net loss of $82,000.00. Do you think the SEC will file anything against Ellen for her sales of JOSB? Is there any cause to do so? Analyze her transactions with respect to insider trading activity (based on what you know) and whether she should be concerned. Is her prior trading activity a defense? Should Ellen have avoided discussing JOSB publicly on her show because she typically trades their stock? (Points: 30)

MGMT 520 Week 6 You Decide ES

MGMT 520 Week 6 You Decide ES

To Download This Material Click HERE: DOWNLOAD

Or Copy The Link:  http://www.fortuneofstudents.com/mgmt-520-week-6-you-decide-es/

Product Description

1.

Question :

Teddy’s Supplies’ CEO has asked you to advise him on the facts of the case and your opinion of their potential liability. He wants to settle the case. Write a memo to him that states your view of whether the company is exposed to liability on all issues you feel are in play. Include in your memo any laws that apply and any precedent cases either for or against Teddy’s case that impact liability. Include in the memo your suggested “offer of settlement” to Virginia. Back up your offer using your analysis of the case against Teddy’s.

2.

Question :

The NJ Human Rights commission found that Pollard was the victim of sexual harassment and disparate treatment. Please answer these questions:

  1. Provide the most current definition of “sexual harassment,” including a definition of quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment. Name an appellate court case in which an employer was found liable for either quid pro quo or hostile environment sexual harassment. Describe the facts of the case and the decision the court came to in the case. Include the citation to the case and a link to it online. Would the case apply to Pollard’s case? Why or why not? Would you want to use this case in Teddy’s favor or Pollard’s favor? (10 points)
  2. Explain which form of sexual harassment you suspect the NJ Human Rights commission found Virginia had been a victim of and why you feel that is the case. Provide law or a case to support your position. If you feel Pollard was not a victim of harassment in this case, explain why you feel that way, and provide law or a case to support your position. (10 points)
  3. Explain what defenses to sexual harassment Teddy’s had in this case. (Include the name and citation of at least two federal or state sexual harassment cases that provide precedent support to your defense statement.) (10 points)
  4. What is disparate treatment and why do you think the Human Rights commission found it had occurred? Do you agree with this decision? (10 points)

3.

Question :

Review the sexual harassment policy that Teddy’s has in place and that Virginia Pollard signed. Virginia Pollard claims she had planned to make an anonymous complaint but the website allowing that was down on the day she tried to do so. During the Human Rights Commission case, a review of the website statistics shows that Virginia accessed the website for downloading dental coverage forms at least three times during the time frame of the alleged discrimination. The commission determined that this ability of Teddy’s to track employees’ use of the site was a violation of their anonymity and therefore refused to consider this information. The circuit court did consider this in their decision. Provide three recommendations to the CEO for a way to ensure that employees in the future can not claim “technical issues” for why they didn’t make a complaint. Explain, in your recommendations, the legal consequences to an employee if they do not utilize the complaint mechanism of the sexual harassment policy. Support these recommendations with current case law.

4.

Question :

How would Pollard’s case be impacted if her replacement had been a female? Would her case be different? Would her damages be different? Explain your answer.

MGMT 520 Week 5 Midterm (Set 1)

MGMT 520 Week 5 Midterm (Set 1)

To Download This Material Click HERE: DOWNLOAD

Or Copy The Link:  http://www.fortuneofstudents.com/mgmt-520-week-5-midterm-set-1/

Product Description

These are the automatically computed results of your exam. Grades for essay questions, and comments from your instructor, are in the “Details” section below.     Date Taken:
Time Spent:
Points Received:    190 / 190 (100%)

Question Type:    # Of Questions:    # Correct:
Short    2    N/A
Essay    4    N/A

Grade Details – All Questions
1.    Question :    TCO B. Infuriated when Harry Reid is re-elected during the 2010 fall election, the Republicans in Congress decide to take matters into their own hands. In 2011, the House of Representatives passes a new “Freedom isn’t Free Act” that requires that anyone who wants to vote in the 2012 presidential election must prove that they paid at least $200 in federal income tax in the past year, including people aged 18 (who typically are deducted on their parents’ returns and do not pay income tax). Anyone who received the “earned income credit” is barred from voting unless they return the payment from the government. Proof of payment of the tax can be made by showing a copy of the prior year’s W2, a copy of the prior year’s tax return, or a signed statement from the IRS stating that the payment of more than $200 in federal income tax has been made. Citizens who do not pay taxes can still vote if they donate $200.00 to the federal government as voluntary income tax and get a statement from the IRS that they have done so. The law sunsets on December 31, 2012. List two bases under which someone impacted by this law could argue to have the law overturned.

Student Answer:        I think the strongest defense to this law can be found in The United States Constitution, in Article VI, section 3, which clearly prohibits the denial to anyone to vote based on several key points. Specifically, the Voting Rights act of 1965 and the 24th amendment has provided that no voting right shall be denied for failure to pay a poll or tax to the federal government. What the Republicans are trying to do clearly violates the 24th Amendment of the Constitution, and is therefore a strong defense against such an activity. Section 1 of the 24th Amendment of the Constitution states that the right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments require that the federal government and the states observe due process when they deprive a person of life, liberty, or property. Due process has both procedural and substantive meanings. Substantive due process attacks on such regulation can be carried out in this case. References: http://americanhistory.about.com/od/usconstitution/a/24th-Amendment.htm

Instructor Explanation:    Students will get credit for listing any of these two: unconstitutional, equal protection, violation of 24th Amendment, “unlawful poll tax,” violation of the 14th Amendment, discrimination, First Amendment. 7.5 points each. If any student lists cases that are listed as precedent in the following case that explains this, this also gives credit. If a student lists the actual Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, then that also counts. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0383_0663_ZO.html

Points Received:    15 of 15
Comments:

MGMT 520 Week 4 Contracts and IP Issues – C; You Decide Project

MGMT 520 Week 4 Contracts and IP Issues – C; You Decide Project

To Download This Material Click HERE: DOWNLOAD

Or Copy The Link:  http://www.fortuneofstudents.com/mgmt-520-week-4-contracts-and-ip-issues-c-you-decide-project/

Product Description

MGMT 520

(Legal, Political and Ethical Dimensions of Business)

Week 4

Contracts and IP Issues – C; You Decide Project

Scenario

Week 4 You Decide GM520 Legal, Political and Ethical Dimensions

Scenario Summary

This group project covers a contract dispute situation. As a group, work through the following questions. Feel free to ask further questions in the thread of your group members, and answer your group members questions as well. The best work will be where all group members work together to get the questions answered. You will be graded on the quality of your posts, but points will be deducted if your answers are duplicates of your group members’. Take turns and build on posts. The questions below have more than one part within each of them so work through them together. Have fun with this! The main thing is that you learn from this exercise, along with creating some quality collaboration with your group. Read the Group Project under Course Home or the Assignments page for this week for the full grading rubric for this group project. Good luck!

Download and review thecontract here.

Your Role/Assignment

You are the manager of a large data processing project. Your company, Systems Inc., worked very hard to obtain a contract with Big Bank to do their conversions from their recent acquisition, Small Bank. The bank met with several companies to discuss who would do the best work on the contract. During your meeting with Big Bank, you told them that you had “never missed a conversion deadline.” At the time, your company had never missed a conversion deadline, but the company had only done three conversions. You also told them that your data processing systems were the fastest around.” After months of negotiation, Big Bank signed the contract. The president of Big Bank said, “We like fast, and you guys are fast. We choose you.”

You started work on the data conversion immediately (ahead of contract). According to the contract, your team was responsible for ensuring that the new bank’s data were converted to Big Bank’s data processing system. The contract involved six large conversions. The first involved converting Big Bank’s savings accounts, the second its checking accounts, the third its investment portfolio, the fourth its credit card, the fifth its mortgage portfolios, and the six its large business loans. Your team completed four of the six conversions without a problem. The fifth task, the largest and most important, has encountered numerous problems. Some problems have been based on personnel issues on your part and other issues have been based on the bank’s failure to provide you with necessary information. One issue resulted when the conversion was delayed for over one week. The data to be converted were formatted differently than the bank’s previous specifications provided. For that reason, the data conversion fields needed to be changed. A provision in the contract required your company to receive four people’s approval before making any changes to the conversion data fields, and one of those four people, Glenda Givealot, was out of the country doing missionary work in an area of the world that did not have cell phone reception. Another issue resulted when the conversion was supposed to occur. Because of the change in the timeline, the conversion schedule had to change. The weekend the conversion was rescheduled to occur, an ice storm struck the state where your data processing computers were housed. Your facility lost electricity for 3 days and the conversion was delayed again until power could be restored.

K E Y P L A Y E R S

Big Bank President

The bank’s president, who is a known hothead, was furious. He called you after power was restored and yelled,

“We are rescinding this contract!”

He also threatened to take the case to court to seek damages.

Systems Inc. President

Your company president wants this situation resolved amicably. He also wants to maintain the contract with the bank, as he sees the potential for a large amount of business with the bank in the future if this contract proves successful. Corporate counsel believes that the bank just needs to be shown that they are out of compliance with the contract just as we are and that both parties are to “blame.” He wants you to start negotiations with the bank to modify certain provisions of the contract to make expectations clearer.

Y O U D E C I D E

Activity

Below is the list of questions you should work together to answer in this thread. Feel free to come up with more to answer together if you need them.

Can Big Bank’s president rescind the contract? Under what circumstances can a contract be rescinded by either party? What facts have to be alleged and proven? What is the result of a contract that is rescinded? Big Bank’s president also threatens legal action. What potential causes of action could you foresee him bringing in court? Would he be successful? Why or why not? What arguments could Systems Inc. raise in its defense? What are Big Bank’s potential damages? Review the facts provided and the sample contract. What provisions of the contract could you cite to support an argument that it is not in Big Banks best interest to rescind the contract? What facts could you cite to support an argument that Big Bank be responsible for some of these issues and/or not in compliance with the contract? In this situation, amicable resolution of problems is greatly preferred by your company. Would this be true in all contract disputes? In what situations and why would you decide to move to litigation over amicable resolution? There are three types of contract performance: complete, substantial, and material breach. Describe the differences (and similarities) among the three, and explain some of the legal ramifications for one or more of these types of performances. (e.g., what happens if one party performs completely but the other party performs only substantially?) Give examples from outside readings or experiences in your career or personal business life. What are the two most important concepts from this exercise that will help you in future contract negotiations? (All students must answer this question for full credit in this project.)You Decide: Contract Creation and Management – Group Discussion Thread

Make sure you have a “Group” thread showing this week. If not, e-mail your instructor ASAP. Review the You Decide Scenario found in your Group Area. Enter the Group Thread by no later than Wednesday to discuss the aspects of the scenario with your group. Your grade will be based on making at least six good, high-quality posts over at least three days to the thread that reflect on the You Decide’s contract issues and that answer the questions posed at the beginning of the thread. Your instructor will NOT lead this thread – it will be up to the groups to run the thread. (Take this opportunity to get to know your classmates in your group!)  You earn 75 points in this project, set up as follows: (60 possible) Quality/quantity post points. You can earn up to 10 points for each high-quality post to the thread. A high-quality postwill reflect on a learning tip from the You Decide, provide significant factual background from the You Decide that helps explain a learning point being made in the threads, pose an exceptional question that moves the group thread forward in a manner that creates more learning (while responding to another student’s question or thought), or will provide a definitive and analytical answer to one of the main questions in the thread. Faculty may deduct points for less-than-high-quality posts (however, making more than six posts will help “ensure” that you will achieve the full complement of points, as you will get credit for each post you make, up to the maximum amount of 60 points for this part of the project). (10 possible) Days posted. You must post on at least three days. You will get 3 points credit for each day you post. (“I agree”- or “Yeah, great post!”-style posts will not count for a “day posted.” The post must have some quality to count on the day). One point will be given to each student who posts their first post to the Group Project thread by no later than Wednesday. (5 possible) Group points. How well your group works together will give you 5 possible points. Ways to get points include the following: build on each other’s posts (i.e., read group members’ posts and respond) and ensure all questions in the SIM project thread beginning are covered (i.e., don’t duplicate group members’ work – build on their answer or answer another question). Ways to lose points include requiring instructor intervention in the group process, failing to work together, and ignoring each other’s posts. (This group grade will be the same for each student in the group who posts value-added posts on at least three days in the thread. If a student posts less than three days, his or her group grade may be lower than the other group members’ grade due to not helping the group with facilitation of the thread. Harassment or lack of netiquette in a thread may also be a reason for an instructor to deduct one group members’ grade over others.)

MGMT 520 Week 3 Negligence, Product Liability, Warranties, And Really Hot Coffee – Homework ES

MGMT 520 Week 3 Negligence, Product Liability, Warranties, And Really Hot Coffee – Homework ES

To Download This Material Click HERE: DOWNLOAD

Or Copy The Link:  http://www.fortuneofstudents.com/mgmt-520-week-3-negligence-product-liability-warranties-and-really-hot-coffee-homework-es/

Product Description

1)  What are the elements of negligence that Mr.Margreiter will need to prove against the hotel in order to win his case? List the five elements here.

2)  Applying the facts you have from the case problem above only, lay out a case for negligence against the hotel. Use the elements to outline the case. Start with the first element, explain what facts you have for or against that element, and then continue through the five elements of negligence. If you do not have enough facts to make your case, explain what facts you would need to have in order to support a case of negligence.

3)  What defense(s) does the hotel have on its side? List (and define) those here. Very briefly state why you think the hotel could use this defense

1.

Question :

During an appeal, the appeals court is required to rely on the evidence submitted during the trial. The “record,” which is made by both parties during the trial, including all objections and other submissions of evidence, is binding on the appeals court, unless it was erroneous or not reasonable to believe or accept that evidence. Further, decisions of fact and credibility are typically left to the jury to make, and appeals courts prefer not revisiting those decisions (unless they are beyond the weight of the evidence or defy credulity.) Because the jury can weigh the body language of the witnesses during trial, and the record on appeal can’t show that, appeal courts prefer allowing juries to make “fact-finding” decisions. Judges on appeal try to look for legal theories to overturn cases (or uphold them.) They make the “law” based decisions, based on the record before them.

With that understanding, explain the decision of the appeals court in the Margreiter case. In doing so, discuss which facts the court relied on in its decision and which facts the losing party requested the appeals court decide the case on, although it refused to do so.

2.

Question :

Now review the Nordmanncase. The Margreitercourt used this case to assist it with making its decision (see line two of paragraph #4 of the Margreiter opinion.) What did the Nordmann court say was the “duty of care” a hotel owes to a guest to protect him from injury by third persons? Provide that here. Then, review the facts that the Nordmann court relied on to determine there had been a breach of the duty by the Nordmann court. Briefly recite those here as well.

3.

Question :

Notice that the Margreiter court doesn’t state which duty it imposed on the hotel – it simply recites as “precedent” the Nordmann case for its legal basis. Now that you know the duty of care that the Margreiter court used in its decision, briefly compare the two sets of facts from the two cases. Then answer these questions:

  1. a) Do you feel that the Margreiter case had as strong facts as did the Nordmann case for holding the hotel liable? Why or why not?
  2. b) Which facts do you feel most strongly weigh in favor of the court’s decision in the Margreiter case?
  3. c) Which facts do you feel were a stretch by the court in Margreiter?
  4. d) Which case do you feel was more of a “slam-dunk” case to decide and why?

4.

Question :

Do you agree with the decisions by the Nordmannand Margreiter courts? Do you feel that the decisions were ethical in nature? Why or why not? Use one of your ethical dilemma resolution models to analyze the court’s decision of one of the two cases to help support your answer and include that analysis in your answer (i.e., Laura Nash, front page of the newspaper, Blanchard & Peale, Wall Street Journal). Make sure to set out the steps of the model and apply your reasoning and facts to the model in your answer.

MGMT 520 Week 2 Assignment Administrative Regulations

MGMT 520 Week 2 Assignment Administrative Regulations

To Download This Material Click HERE: DOWNLOAD

Or Copy The Link:  http://www.fortuneofstudents.com/mgmt-520-week-2-assignment-administrative-regulations/

Product Description

Assignment:

  1. State the administrative agency which controls the regulation. Explain why this agency and your proposed regulation interest you (briefly). Will this proposed regulation affect you or the business in which you are working? If so, how?
  2. Describe the proposal/change.
  3. Write the public comment that you would submit to this proposal. If the proposed regulation deadline has already passed, write the comment you would have submitted. Explain briefly what you wish to accomplish with your comment.
  4. Provide the “deadline” by which the public comment must be made. (If the date has already passed, please provide when the deadline was.
  5. Once you have submitted your comment, what will you be legally entitled to do later in the promulgation process (if you should choose to do so)? (See the textbook’s discussion of the Administrative Procedure Act.)
  6. If the proposal passes, identify and explain the five legal theories you could use in an attempt to have (any) administrative regulation declared invalid and overturned in court.
  7. Which of these challenges would be the best way to challenge the regulation you selected for this assignment if you wanted to have the regulation overturned and why?