Case Study: The State Of Confusion

484 Words2 Pages
The State of Confusion BUS/415 Yolanda K. Ramon February 22, 2012 University of Phoenix Ms. Dottie May The State of Confusion The State of Confusion can be located where trucks travel frequently. Only B-type truck hitches are available for manufacturing by the State of Confusion Company. A statue was required in this state that required all trucks and trailers be towed by a B-type truck trailer, and is required to install a B-type truck hitch when traveling through this state. Ms. Tanya Trucker, an out of state trucking company owner, was quite unhappy with the statue and the increases of costs that her company had incurred. She decided to file a suit. Ms. Tanya Trucker is a resident and a business owner in the state of Denial.…show more content…
In this case, Confusion has put a burden on trucks and trailers which pass through Confusion for the interstate destination. In the end the Dormant Commerce Clause proviso would most likely be used in the court to make the decision on the statue. In the past the Supreme Court decided that the Gibbons versus Ogden would be addressed. The decision was stated that the state cannot act to commerce decisions without the permission of Congress (Farlex, 2010). With the results from the Gibbons versus Ogden case, Ms. Tanya Trucker would likely prevail against the suit that the State of Confusion had tried to enforce of the B-type hitch. The statue will be overturned because it places an unfair burden to truckers that have other hitches. Truckers would have broken a law in order for them to possess a special hitch that could only be installed in that state. REFERENCES Farlex. (2010). Gibbons v. Ogden. Retrevied on July 30, 2010 from National Paralegal College. (2007). The Dormant Commerce Clause. Retrieved on July 30, 2010 from http://national

More about Case Study: The State Of Confusion

Open Document