4. It appears that the employer intentionally disposed of the parts. The disposal of these parts may prejudice the client's ability to recover in any product liability lawsuits against the corporations involved in the manufacture, distribution, inspection, or servicing of the conveyor. References: Putman, W. H., & Albright, J. R. (January 2013). Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing Third Edition.
Contract Provisions Management has the right to terminate ay employee when the company feels that an employee has violated company policy such as the anti-nepotism policy or in any area that is not in compliance with company best practices. The union has the right to grieve any action taken by the company violates employee rights as provided in Article IV of the CBA. Position of the
The organization could experience lawsuits if any of the contracted workers have any problems and could leave the organization liable for damages When the local customs and laws conflict with the customs and laws of an organization operating abroad which should prevail? Explain why. Local customs should always prevail. When there is conflict with local customs and laws a business could suffer from a poor reputation defined as insensitive to the foreign company that the business is being conducted in. When companies operate overseas there needs to be some kind of work through that will cover both the foreign sensibilities as well as the rules
Issue: Zelma Mitchell, the petitioner's actions constituted misconduct so to disqualify her from certain unemployment compensation benefits. 59-9-6 (B), N.M.S.A. 1953. Rule: Misconduct is limited to conduct evincing such wilful or wanton disregard of an employer's interests as is found in deliberate violations or disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or in carelessness or negligence of such degree or recurrence as to manifest equal culpability, wrongful intent or evil design or to show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer's interests or the employee's duties and obligations to his employer. Application: Mrs. Mitchell's insubordination, improper attire, name calling and other conduct evinced a wilful disregard of the interest of the Center.
The definition states: Misconduct is limited to conduct evoking such willful or wanton behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or in carelessness or negligence of such degree or recurrence as to manifest equal culpability, wrongful intent or evil design or to show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer’s interest or of the employee’s duties and obligations to his employer. Application: Mrs. Mitchell’s name calling, improper attire, and insubordination evinced a willful disregard to the employer. However, each separate incident
Lach v. Man O’War, LLC ISSUE(S): Was the restructuring of the Partnership business form invalid? Was the restructuring a conversion that violated KRS 275.370 and did the restructuring made it not feasible for the partnership to continue with business therefore violating KRS 362.490? RULE(S): KRS 275.370 in part states that a partnership or limited partnership may be converted to a limited liability company if it is approved by all the partners or by a number or percentage specified for conversion in the partnership agreement or, in the case of a limited partnership, by all the partners, notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in the limited partnership agreement. KRS 362.490 in part states that a general partner has all the rights and power and be subject to all the restrictions and liabilities of a partner in a partnership without limited partners, except that without the written consent of the specific act by all the limited partners, a general partner or all the general partners have no authority. They cannot do any act that will make it impossible for them to carry on the business of the partnership.
Regarding the case of Mr. Bilbo Baggins litigation against Orc Industries Corporation for wrongful dismissal, there are quite a number of relevant legal principles and concepts that apply to the plaintiff’s case. Firstly, when Mr. Baggins was terminated by Orc Industries Corp. they failed to provide him with reasonable notice, which would imply that the company intended to terminate Mr. Baggins on the grounds of just cause. Just cause is a term that is applied when a company intends to terminate an employee for “Employee conduct that amounts to a fundamental breach of employment contract”. More specifically, just cause exists when an employee is guilty of one or more of the following; a serious misconduct (or several minor misconducts over a period of time), habitual neglect of duty, incompetence, willful disobedience, or incompatible conduct. (DuPlessis, O'Byrne, Enman & Gunz, 2011) Orc Industries Corp. however, did not cite any other reasons for terminating Mr. Baggins apart from “dishonesty, and coming to work drunk”.
Therefore, there is a situation of Undisclosed Principal, where an agent acts without disclosing either the existence of a principal or the principal’s identity and the agent is directly liable to the third party. If Newcorp’s senior management is concerned over his public display of his personal views as a basis for his termination the judgment is erroneous. However, there might have been some apprehension over the agency relationship to third parties because principals have both contractual and tort liability for certain acts of their agents (Jennings, 2006). The contract liability of a principal is not only determined by either what he intended or by the limitations agreed to privately by the agent and the principal, but also the third parties have certain contract enforcement rights depending on the nature of the agent’s work and the authority given
One of the events that take place in this hypothetical situation is CadMex’s decision to grant sublicensing agreements. Sublicensing is a license giving rights of production or marketing of products or services to a person or company that is not the primary holder of such rights ("Sublicense," 2013). When sublicensing agreements, what could work against CadMex are the lawsuits that could start to accumulate due to the negligence of a third party. If there is a worker that does something wrong, damages property, or does something outside of the agreement, the original company could be held liable for the negligence. There is also the possibility of these third parties putting out an inferior product from which CadMex would receive the negative publicity
Anitra Martin Legal risk and opportunity in employment September 29, 2009 Law/531 Legal encounter 1: Newcorp has the right under the common law of employee termination at will. This is a contract of employment for other than a definite term is terminable at will by either party. This common law employer may dismiss their employees at will for good cause, for no cause or even for cause morally wrong without being guilty of legal wrong. The only way that pat can prove that they let him go unjustly he would have to prove that they showed discrimination towards him based on race, sex, religion, or age. Legal encounter 2: Newcorp has a liability of sexual harassment because of the fact that Paula ended their relationship and