BusinessLaw Project One
BusinessLaw Project One
Section1- Sam and Irene
Suppose that Sam tells several of his friends about Irene instructing the man to take goods without paying for them after the tsunami disaster.  If Irene files a tort action against Sam alleging slander, will her suit be successful?  Why or why not?
Irene’ssuit will not be successful. First, and foremost, slander is anyaction that involves making a false statement against anotherindividual. It is evident that Irene did instruct the man to take thegoods without for them, and for this reason, there is no evidence ofslander. In fact, if there is anyone who is to be accused of beingslanderous, it should Irene. This is because she accused Sam ofsomething that he did not do. Also, Irene’s lawsuit would not besuccessful because she would have gone against the clean handsdoctrine(Dransfield, 2003).The doctrine states that an individual should not be compensated ifhe/she acts unethically or unfaithfully to the law. Irene actedunethically to the law by instructing the man to take goods withoutpaying for them.
2.    Nowsuppose that Irene wins the election and becomes the city’s mayor. Sam then writes a letter to the editor of the local newspaperdisclosing Irene’s misconduct.  If Irene accuses Sam ofcommitting libel, what defenses could Sam assert?
IfIrene accuses Sam of libel, he would able to defend himself in threeways. The first way would be informing the court that he overheardIrene’s conversation. He would paraphrase Irene’s words, and makeit clear to the judge, and the jury how he learnt of Irene’smisconduct. The second way would be for Sam to ask the court to callin the man that Irene instructed to purchase the goods. He would bebrought to court, and asked to speak the truth while under oath. Theother way would be to inform the court that Irene might have beenbitter about the falling out. Sam would let the court know that hemade the choice of backing out of the partnership after learning ofIrene’s misconduct. The three defenses mentioned above, could beable to assist Sam in gaining favor from the judge (Kupferman,1990).
3.    Supposenow that Irene, who is angry with her brother for disclosing herbusiness improprieties, writes a letter to the editor falselyaccusing Sam of having sexual relations with her neighbor’sthirteen-year-old daughter.  For what intentional tort or tortscould Sam sue Irene in this situation?
Samcould sue Irene of committing libel. In this case, Irene knows thatSam did not have sexual relations with the thirteen-year-old, and isaccusing him falsely because she is bitter about the situation. Ireneis deliberately accusing Sam falsely in an attempt to damage Sam’sreputation. It is Sam’s right not to be falsely accused, and forthis reason, he could sue Irene(Kupferman, 1990).
Section2- Sam and Marvin
Sam has sued Marvin for his injuries and the loss of his ferret and emotional distress related to these. Discuss Sam`s claims, any defenses and their likely resolution.
Theplaintiff, Sam, sued Marvin for causing him more than one damages. Inthis case, Sam claims were his injuries, the loss of his ferret, andemotional stress. However, the claims put forward by Sam were notMarvin’s fault instead they were indeed caused by the slowness ofthe security system. In fact, Marvin was screaming from afar, andthis should have been a signal for Sam to move out of the way. Also,Sam is to blame for the accident because he was oblivious of hissurroundings. If this was Marvin’s fault, he would have injured thepeople who were next to Sam as well. Furthermore, Sam’s ferret washidden in his pocket so it was impossible for the plaintiff to expectMarvin to know that the small animal was in his possession. Sam’sclaim on emotional distress is null because it is Marvin who was infact in emotional turmoil because he was about to miss his flight.The resolution would, therefore, be to sue the airport forincompetence. The court should state the fact that if the securitysystem was not null, there would no damages caused. If the system wasfast enough, Marvin would not have been running to catch his flightbecause he would get to it in good time. The legal theory put inplace therefore, would be the fact that the security system at theairport was defective. As a result, the airport was to be answerablefor Sam’s injuries, the loss of his ferret, his supposed emotionaldistress, and Marvin’s “psychotic” stunt. The resolutiontherefore would come down to the court being in favor of Marvin(Hafter et al., 2004)
Section3 – Sam and Region West
On what basis might the court hold that Region West was not liable for Drew’s acts? Discuss fully.
DonnaDrew, who was a nurse at Region West Hospital, breached theconfidentiality pact between the employee, and the patient. Somehealth problems are delicate and as result, it is difficult forpatients to share with the doctors or nurses. For this reason,confidentiality is important because it encourages patients to be ashonest as possible when they visit the hospital.
Afterthe injuries Sam acquired from the airport, he was treated at RegionWest hospital where he was diagnosed with genital herpes as well.Later, the nurse discussed Sam’s condition with her friends, andSam’s friends, and this resulted in Sam filing a lawsuit againstRegion West. However, Sam should have filed the lawsuit against DonnaDrew as an individual due to various reasons. Firstly, Region Westhas set aside the handbook that requires all the employees to keepthe records of the patients as confidential as possible(Abbott et al., 2007).For this reason, it is important to realize that the hospital hadmade it to clear to the employees that they should not breach theconfidentiality pact. Furthermore, due to the existence of thehandbook, it is expected that the hospital gave the employeeseducation concerning this issue. In addition to this, Region Westmust have educated the employees on the repercussions in the eventthat they should share the information of the patients. Also, RegionWest hospital should not be held liable in regard to the ignorance ofDonna Drew. She knew that sharing the information of Sam with otherpeople was unethical, and against the law but, that did not stop herfrom doing it. Nevertheless, Donna Drew seemed like a person whoenjoyed gossip, and for this reason, the blame should be put on her,and not Region West hospital. It is Donna Drew who caused emotionalturmoil, and damage to Sam’s reputation, and not Region Westhospital as a whole. Also, the court may ask Donna Drew to give acertain amount of money as a form of compensation for the damagecaused by her actions (Abbottet al., 2007).Region West hospital was not liable for the actions portrayed byDrew, and for this reason, she would appear in court as anindividual. Other than the imposition of sanctions, Donna Drew’scontract with Region West hospital may be terminated as soon aspossible. The court should impose heavy sanctions on Donna Drew, asthis will assist in doing avoiding any future instances ofconfidentiality breaching (Abbottet al., 2007).
Abbott,K., Pendlebury, N., & Wardman, K. (2007). Businesslaw.London: Thomson.
Dransfield,R. (2003). Businesslaw made easy.Cheltenham, UK: Nelson Thornes.
Gillies,P. (2004). Businesslaw.Sydney: Federation Press.
Hafter,J. L., & Fedor, V. L. (2004). EMSand the law.Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Kupferman,T. R. (1990). Defamation–libeland slander.Westport, CT: Meckler.