Friday, April 4, 2014

April 4, 2014

As a response to your posts from yesterday, read the following and answer the questions. 

Doug, a 16 year-old, has a lot of money on his hands with very little time so he decides to hire a personal assistant. When Doug turns 17 and needs a car, he gives specific instructions to his personal assistant (Sam) as the car he wants (personal assistant is 24). Sam follows his instructions exactly, supplies the salesman with a business card and a notarized statement authorizing Sam to act in Doug's place. When Sam brings the car to Doug, Doug has changed his mind and tries to cancel the contract.

1. Is Doug still responsible for the contract?

2. Is Sam responsible?

3. Does the notarized letter give Sam the ability to act in Doug's place?

13 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Doug is responsible because he gave Sam the permission to get that car. Sam had every right to do what he was asked to do.

    2. Sam is noit responsible. He is simply doing whyat he was told to do, this is all on Dougs hands.

    3. The letter does give sam the authority to act in dpugs place, which was dougs idea.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/business/economy/20older.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0



      This is about people over the age of 50 having trouble finding a job because of there age but there protected by the and and discrimination and employment act.

      Delete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah, Doug is still responsible for the contract.
    No Sam is not responsible is not responsible for that, Doug just cant change his mind like that.
    Yes tat notarized letter gives Sam the ability to act in Doug's place, because it was Doug idea.,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-08-28/news/sns-rt-us-fighting-discrimination-20130828_1_inequality-discrimination-black-woman


      This is about someone telling a story on discrimination and fighting. they was saying obama was the first national African-American leader who did not come up through the civil rights movement. He came up though the progressive political movement. Yes this law have been covered you cant just discriminate like that anymore. you can sue somebody for that. school, job, anywhere.

      Delete
  6. Doug is responsible because he had given sam the permission to get the car. As Sam has had every right to do what he was asked to do.

    But, Sam isn't responsible because he was doing everything right but Doug can't simply change his mind.

    Yes the notarized letter gives Sam the ability to act in Dougs place simply because it was al his idea.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 1.) Yes, he is responsible for telling him to give him the car.

    2.) No he was just doing what he was hired to do.

    3.)yes because he was told to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 1. Yes Doug is responsible because he gave Sam the permission to get that car, Sam had the right to do what he was asked to do

    2. No Sam is not responsible

    3.Yes because the letter gives Sam the right to act in Doug's place

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yes Doug is responsible for the contract because he gave Sam permission to get the car.

    Sam isn't responsible because he was doing everything right and had consent.

    Yes the letter gives Sam the ability to act on behalf of Doug's place simply, because it was all his idea.

    ReplyDelete
  10. No, minors are not responsible unless his parents co-signed.
    Yes, Sam would be responsible because he is of age.
    Yes the notarized letter gives Sam the ability to act in Dougs place

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.workforce.com/articles/wal-mart-settles-employee-s-eeoc-disability-discrimination-lawsuit-for-50-000

      This article is about a $50,000 settlement of a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in which Walmart was charged with failing to accommodate a 22-year employee who suffers from cerebral palsy. Marcia Arney had shown the store manager a note from her doctor requesting an accommodation involving periodic breaks off her feet, but the manager refused to return her to her job and instead demanded that she obtain a medical release with no restrictions.
      Walmart is violating employment laws by discriminating against her because of her medical condition.

      Delete