Solutions Manual For Business Law Today, Standard Edition, Text & Summarized Cases 14th Edition By R by welldoneassistant

Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 14e, 9798214045849; Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning

Solution and Answer Guide

Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 14e, 9798214045849; Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning

TABLE OF CONTENTS Critical Thinking Questions in Features .............................................................................1 Ethical Issue—Value Judgment .............................................................................................. 1 Managerial Strategy—Business Questions........................................................................... 2 Landmark in the Law—Application to Today’s World ....................................................... 3 Chapter Review ................................................................................................................... 3 Practice and Review................................................................................................................. 3 Practice and Review: Debate This ......................................................................................... 4 Issue Spotters ........................................................................................................................... 4 Business Scenarios and Case Problems .............................................................................. 5 Critical Thinking and Writing Assignments .......................................................................... 9 Critical Thinking Question in Exhibit 1A-3 .......................................................................... 10 A Sample Court Case—Critical Thinking ............................................................................. 10

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS IN FEATURES ETHICAL ISSUE—VALUE JUDGMENT 1.

Should an administrative authority have the power to make decisions involving hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars—such as canceling student loans—without input from Congress? Why or why not? Solution: When the secretary of education decided to establish a student loan forgiveness program that would have cancelled about $430 million in student debt for as many as 430 million American debtors, several states sued to prevent this unilateral policy resolution from moving forward. The case eventually made it to the United States Supreme Court, where the administration of President Joseph Biden insisted that Congress had given it this power in the HEROES Act, which allows the secretary of education to respond to a national emergency by waiving or modifying any “statutory or regulatory” provision governing student-loan programs. The Supreme Court rejected this reasoning. In his opinion, Supreme Court Chief Justice John R. Roberts, Jr., used the language of the HEROES Act to interpret congressional intent. Congress’s use of the word “modify” meant that a government agency could make “modest adjustments and additions to existing provisions,” Roberts

Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 14e, 9798214045849; Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning

wrote. “Not transform them.” He went on to suggest that the debt-forgiveness program “modified” student loan laws in the same way that the “French Revolution ‘modified’ the status of the French nobility—it has abolished them and supplanted them with a new regime entirely.” Here, the Court asserted that an administrative body had not modified an existing Congressional plan. Rather, the Biden administration had used its authority to enact a major new law that Congress had not chosen to enact itself. Even given the leeway that administrative agencies have within the separation of powers, the executive branch had gone too far in this case. Other members of the Court, disagreeing with the majority opinion, stated that the financial burden being suffered by millions of student loan debtors was a sufficient “emergency” to justify the loan forgiveness program, no matter its cost. To this, Chief Justice Roberts responded, “The question here is not whether something should be done; it is who has the authority to do it.” Thus, when determining the ethical components of a government decision with regard to business law, one must not only consider the inherent rightness or wrongness of the decision. One must also consider the consequences of giving the government agency or individual the power to make the decision.

MANAGERIAL STRATEGY—BUSINESS QUESTIONS 1.

“When faced with a clearly erroneous precedent, my rule is simple,” writes Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. “We should not follow it.” How do these words offer a cautionary tale for managers relying on stare decisis to make business decisions? Solution: Simply put, the doctrine of stare decisis applies in all instances, except when it does not. As noted in the text, a court is able to depart from precedent if it feels that legal, social, or technological changes have rendered the previous decision untenable. In this case, just because the United States Supreme Court believes, at present, that automobile salespeople are exempt from the overtime rules of the FLSA, there is a possibility that the Court could reverse itself in the future. In this context, managers need to be aware that (1) any decision they make based on a court decision is subject to change, and (2) if they believe that a previous business law-related court decision is flawed, they can challenge it in court.

2. Should Roberta consider paying her salespeople overtime even though it is not required by federal law? Why or why not? Solution: Just because Roberta is legally able to avoid paying the salespeople at her new used car dealership overtime, should she? As with so many managerial decisions, the answer to this question involves the tricky determination of costs and benefits. On the one hand, Roberta’s costs will be lower if she does not have to pay overtime to the salespeople. On the other hand, the salespeople may be more motivated if they feel they are being properly compensated for the extra hours they spend on the lot. The extra motivation will likely lead to additional sales, which very well may offset the overtime costs.

Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 14e, 9798214045849; Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning

LANDMARK IN THE LAW—APPLICATION TO TODAY’S WORLD 1.

The equitable maxims listed here underlie many of the legal rules and principles that are commonly applied by the courts today—and that you will read about in this book. For instance, in the contracts materials, you will read about the doctrine of promissory estoppel. Under this doctrine, a person who has reasonably and substantially relied on the promise of another may be able to obtain some measure of recovery, even though no enforceable contract exists. The court will estop (bar) the one making the promise from asserting the lack of a valid contract as a defense. The rationale underlying the doctrine of promissory estoppel is similar to that expressed in which of the maxims just listed? Solution: The rationale underlying the doctrine of promissory estoppel is similar to that expressed in the fourth and fifth equitable maxims listed in the feature. The fourth maxim supports the notion that the law should not be applied unfairly just because the law does not provide a solution to a particular problem. The fifth maxim holds that those administering the law should not get bogged down in technicalities when doing so leads to unfairness or injustice. In a perfect legal world, then, a lack of a valid contract should not punish a party who has justice and fairness on their side.

CHAPTER REVIEW PRACTICE AND REVIEW Suppose that the California legislature passes a law that severely restricts carbon dioxide emissions of automobiles in that state. A group of automobile manufacturers files a suit against the state of California to prevent enforcement of the law. The automakers claim that a federal law already sets fuel economy standards nationwide and that these standards are essentially the same as carbon dioxide emission standards. According to the automobile manufacturers, it is unfair to allow California to impose more stringent regulations than those set by the federal law. Using the information presented in the chapter, answer the following questions. 1.

Who are the parties (the plaintiffs and the defendant) in this lawsuit? Solution: In this situation, the automobile manufacturers are the plaintiffs, and the state of California is the defendant.

2. Are the plaintiffs seeking a legal remedy or an equitable remedy? Why? Solution: The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction, which is an equitable remedy, to prevent the state of California from enforcing its statute restricting carbon dioxide emissions. 3. What is the primary source of the law that is at issue here? Solution: This case involves a law passed by the California legislature and a federal statute; thus, the primary source of the law is statutory law. 4. Read through the appendix that follows this chapter, and then answer the following question: Where would you look to find the relevant California and federal laws?

Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 14e, 9798214045849; Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning

Solution: Federal statutes are found in the United States Code, and California statutes are published in the California Code. You would look in both of these sources to find the relevant state and federal statutes.

PRACTICE AND REVIEW: DEBATE THIS 1.

Under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts are obligated to follow the precedents established in their jurisdiction unless there is a compelling reason not to do so. Should U.S. courts continue to adhere to this common law principle, given that our government now regulates so many areas by statute? Solution: Both England and the U.S. legal systems were constructed on the common law system. The doctrine of stare decisis has always been a major part of this system—courts should follow precedents when they are clearly established, except when compelling reasons dictate otherwise. Even though more common law is being turned into statutory law, the doctrine of stare decisis is still valid. After all, statutes often must be interpreted by courts. What better basis for judges to render their decisions than by basing them on precedents related to the subject at hand? In contrast, some students may argue that the doctrine of stare decisis is passé. There is certainly less common law governing, say, environmental law than there was 100 years ago. Given that federal and state governments increasingly are regulating more aspects of commercial transactions between merchants and consumers, perhaps the courts should simply stick to statutory language when disputes arise.

ISSUE SPOTTERS 1.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides protection for the free exercise of religion. A state legislature enacts a law that outlaws all religions that do not derive from the Judeo-Christian tradition. Is this law valid within that state? Why or why not? (See Sources of American Law.) Solution: No. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and applies to all jurisdictions. A law in violation of the Constitution (in this question, the First Amendment to the Constitution) will be declared unconstitutional.

2. Apex Corporation learns that a federal administrative agency is considering a rule that will have a negative impact on the firm’s ability to do business. Does the firm have any opportunity to express its opinion about the pending rule? Explain. (See Sources of American Law.) Solution: Yes. Administrative rulemaking starts with the publication of a notice of the rulemaking in the Federal Register. Among other details, this notice states where and when the proceedings, such as a public hearing, will be held. Proponents and opponents can offer their comments and concerns regarding the pending rule. After reviewing all the comments from the proceedings, the agency’s decision makers consider what was presented and draft the final rule.

Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 14e, 9798214045849; Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning

BUSINESS SCENARIOS AND CASE PROBLEMS 1–1. Binding versus Persuasive Authority. A county court in Illinois is deciding a case involving an issue that has never been addressed before in that state’s courts. The Iowa Supreme Court, however, recently decided a case involving a very similar fact pattern. Is the Illinois court obligated to follow the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision on the issue? If the United States Supreme Court had decided a similar case, would that decision be binding on the Illinois court? Explain. (See The Common Law.) Solution: A decision of a court is binding on all inferior courts. Because no state’s court is inferior to any other state’s court, no state’s court is obligated to follow the decision of another state’s court on an issue. The decision may be persuasive, however, depending on the nature of the case and the particular judge hearing it. A decision of the United States Supreme Court on an issue is binding, like the decision of any higher court, on all inferior courts. The United States Supreme Court is the nation’s highest court, however, and thus, its decisions are binding on all courts, including state courts. 1–2. Sources of Law. This chapter discussed a number of sources of American law. Which source of law takes priority in the following situations, and why? (See Sources of American Law.) 1.

A federal statute conflicts with the U.S. Constitution. Solution: The U.S. Constitution—The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. A law in violation of the Constitution, no matter what its source, will be declared unconstitutional and will not be enforced.

2. A federal statute conflicts with a state constitutional provision. Solution: The federal statute—Under the U.S. Constitution, when there is a conflict between a federal law and a state law, the state law is rendered invalid.

3. A state statute conflicts with the common law of that state. Solution: The state statute—State statutes are enacted by state legislatures. Areas not covered by state statutory law are governed by state case law. 4. A state constitutional amendment conflicts with the U.S. Constitution. Solution: The U.S. Constitution—State constitutions are supreme within their respective borders unless they conflict with the U.S. Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. 1–3. Remedies. Arthur Rabe is suing Xavier Sanchez for breaching a contract in which Sanchez promised to sell Rabe a Van Gogh painting for $150,000. (See The Common Law.) 1.

In this lawsuit, who is the plaintiff, and who is the defendant?

Solution and Answer Guide: Miller, Business Law Today - Standard Edition: Text & Summarized Cases 14e, 9798214045849; Chapter 01: Law and Legal Reasoning

Solution: In a suit by Arthur Rabe against Xavier Sanchez, Rabe is the plaintiff and Sanchez is the defendant. 2. If Rabe wants Sanchez to perform the contract as promised, what remedy should Rabe seek? Solution: Specific performance is the remedy that includes an order to a party to perform a contract as promised. 3. Suppose that Rabe wants to cancel the contract because Sanchez fraudulently misrepresented the painting as an original Van Gogh when in fact it is a copy. In this situation, what remedy should Rabe seek? Solution: Rescission is a remedy that includes an order to cancel a contract. 4. Will the remedy Rabe seeks in either situation be a remedy at law or a remedy in equity? Solution: In both cases, these remedies are remedies in equity. 1–4. Philosophy of Law. After World War II ended in 1945, an international tribunal of judges convened at Nuremberg, Germany. The judges convicted several Nazi war criminals of “crimes against humanity.” Assuming that the Nazis who were convicted had not disobeyed any law of their country and had merely been following their government’s (Hitler’s) orders, what law had they violated? Explain. (See The Common Law.) Solution: Crimes against humanity constituted, at the time of the Nuremberg trials, a new international crime, consisting of “murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds.” In response to the defendants’ assertion that they had only been following orders, the Nuremberg judges explained in part that these were familiar crimes within domestic jurisdictions and thus the accused must have known, when they committed their acts, that they would be considered criminal. In terms of a philosophy of law, it might be said that these criminals violated “natural law.” The oldest and one of the most significant schools of jurisprudence is the natural law school. Those who adhere to the natural law school of thought believe that government and the legal system should reflect universal moral and ethical principles that are inherent in human nature. Because natural law is universal, it takes on a higher order than positive, or conventional, law. The natural law tradition presupposes that the legitimacy of conventional, or positive, law derives from natural law. Whenever it conflicts with natural law, conventional law loses its legitimacy. For example, a precept of natural law may be that murder is wrong, which is a value reflected by specific laws prohibiting murder. If a specific, written law requires murder, it conflicts with the natural law precept, in which case individuals should disobey the written law and obey the natural law. 1–5. Business Case Problem with Sample Answer—Reading Citations. Assume that you want to read the entire court opinion in the case of Friends of Buckingham v. State Air Pollution Control Board, 947 F.3d 68 (4th Cir. 2020). © 2026 Cengage Learning, Inc. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.