Business Law: Unit 2 (Haskell Murray)

Business Law: Unit 2 (Haskell Murray)

memorize.aimemorize.ai (lvl 286)
Section 1

Preview this deck

What does the 1st Amendment protect?

Front

Star 0%
Star 0%
Star 0%
Star 0%
Star 0%

0.0

0 reviews

5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0

Active users

0

All-time users

0

Favorites

0

Last updated

6 years ago

Date created

Mar 1, 2020

Cards (118)

Section 1

(50 cards)

What does the 1st Amendment protect?

Front

Includes nonverbal communication, political speech, commercial speech

Back

Article 2

Front

Defines power of the president - appointment - legislation - foreign policy

Back

Substantial Effect Rule

Front

Congress may regulate any activity that has a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce

Back

A search WITH a warrant is unlawful if:

Front

No probable cause, warrant did not specify place or items, extended beyond the scope of the warrant

Back

Executive

Front

Can propose bills to congress, can veto bills

Back

Intermediate scrutiny

Front

Based on gender discrimination

Back

Criminal process

Front

Search warrant, arrest warrant/arrest, indictment, arraignment, plea/trial/appeal

Back

Exclusionary Rule

Front

Evidence obtained illegally (without a warrant or improperly obtained with a warrant) may not be used at trial against the victim of the search

Back

Lawful arrest

Front

Anyone arrested may be searched

Back

A defendant is not guilty of an act if...

Front

They were forced to commit it

Back

Mens Rea

Front

Criminal intent (state of mind)

Back

TN's Response to Kelo v. City of New London

Front

Private benefit/indirect public benefit does not mean public benefit; exemptions: quasi-governmental utility, urban renewal or redevelopment plan in a blighted area

Back

Adjudication

Front

Hearing cases

Back

Obergefell v. Hodges

Front

2015 states obligated to recognize same-sex marriage from other states

Back

Plain view

Front

The evidence is not concealed

Back

Supremacy Clause

Front

Federal law is supreme over state law

Back

Strict scrutiny

Front

Based on race, ethnicity, and fundamental rights

Back

Citizens United v. FEC

Front

2010 decision by Supreme Court holding that corps. are free speech protected by the 1st Amendment

Back

Appointment

Front

President nominates judges/justices & heads of administrative agencies

Back

What does the 1st Amendment say?

Front

"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech"

Back

Dormant Commerce Clause

Front

Used to prohibit state legislation that discriminates against interstate or international commerce

Back

Commerce Clause

Front

Clause stating that congress can regulate interstate and international commerce

Back

Obscenity

Front

1. Appeals to prurient interests, taken as a whole, using community standards; 2. Depicts or describes patently offensive sexual conduct described by state law; 3. Lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value

Back

No expectation of privacy

Front

The police have a right to search any area in which the defendant does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy

Back

Actus Reus

Front

Illegal Act

Back

Takings Clause

Front

Government can take private property for a public purpose, but it must provide fair compensation

Back

Legal speech may be limited by...

Front

Time, place, manner

Back

Article 3

Front

Creates SC, allows congress to make lower courts, 2 key functions: adjudication & judicial review

Back

Miranda Rights

Front

Police must read to someone when being arrested: right to remain silent, anything they say can/will be held against them, and right to a lawyer

Back

Substantive Due Process

Front

Some rights are so fundamental that the government may not take them (voting, speech, travel, privacy)

Back

Automobiles

Front

If lawfully stopped for other reasons, and evidence is visible, police may search entire car

Back

4th Amendment

Front

Prohibits illegal searches and seizures

Back

Article 1

Front

Established congress with 2 houses, gives congress power, regulates commerce between states

Back

14th Amendment

Front

Equal rights of citizens

Back

Stop and frisk

Front

May search a suspect if there is good reason to believe he may be armed

Back

Self-incrimination

Front

The prosecution may not use coercion to force a confession from a suspect, suspect may refuse to answer any questions that could be used to convict him

Back

Kelo v. City of New London

Front

Eminent domain case: local governments may force the sale of private property and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public

Back

Judicial Review

Front

Allows the court to determine the constitutionality of laws

Back

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby

Front

2014 allowed for-profit corporations to be exempt from a law its owners religiously object to if there is a less restrictive means of furthering the law's interest

Back

Articles of Confederation

Front

First governing document of the US, it didn't give the federal government any power to raise money or regulate commerce

Back

Minimal scrutiny

Front

Based on economic and social discrimination

Back

May search without a warrant if:

Front

1. Plain view 2. Stop and frisk 3. Emergencies 4. Automobiles 5. Lawful arrest 6. Consent 7. No expectation of privacy

Back

Emergencies

Front

Such as in a chase; suspect may be searched

Back

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission

Front

1st amendment question: is it actually conveying a message?

Back

Consent

Front

If consent is given by the lawful occupant of the home, police may search it

Back

Fifth Amendment

Front

Due process and takings clause

Back

Procedural Due Process

Front

Government must go through procedures to ensure that the result is fair

Back

Foreign Policy (president)

Front

Coordinates international efforts, negotiates treaties, commander in chief of the military, cannot declare war

Back

Double Jeopardy

Front

A defendant may only be tried once for a particular offense, no matter what is found later

Back

Checks and Balances

Front

A system that allows each branch of government to limit the powers of the other branches in order to prevent abuse of power

Back

Section 2

(50 cards)

Verbal defamation is...

Front

slander (damages = must be proven)

Back

Written defamation is...

Front

libel (damages = presumed)

Back

Strict liability

Front

Liable regardless of state of mind

Back

Arson

Front

Using fire or explosives to damage or destroy property, usually with either malicious or fraudulent intent

Back

Duty to Invitees

Front

To exercise reasonable care to protect invitees against dangerous conditions possessor should know of but invitees are unlikely to discover

Back

8th Amendment

Front

Prohibits cruel/unusual punishment

Back

Res Ipa Loquitur

Front

"The thing speaks for itself"- Negligence is obvious and the incident would not have happened if negligence did not occur.

Back

Theft of Honest Services

Front

The theft of honest services statute prohibits public and private employees from taking bribes or kickback

Back

Larceny

Front

The trespassory taking of personal property with the intent to steal it

Back

Crimes Committed by Business

Front

If someone commits a crime within the scope of his employment and to benefit the corporation, the company is liable

Back

Goals of Racketeering

Front

invest or acquire business, maintain a business using criminal activity, operate a business using criminal activity

Back

Duty to Trespassers

Front

Not to injure intentionally

Back

Slander/libel per se

Front

Some statements are so harsh and potentially damaging that the plaintiff is assumed to be damaged and does not have to prove injury - Accusations of committing a serious crime - Claims of having a sexually transmitted disease or of being an unchaste woman (gender bias in the law) - Alleged professional incompetence

Back

Intentional tort

Front

Doesn't require intention to harm the victim, only intention to perform the act

Back

Assault

Front

Action that causes the victim to fear an imminent battery

Back

Business torts

Front

Intentional torts that occur almost exclusively in a business setting

Back

Defamation

Front

Irresponsible speech to harm another's reputation

Back

Absolute privilege

Front

A witness testifying in a court or legislature may never be sued for defamation

Back

Racketeering Acts

Front

Includes but not limited to embezzlement, arson, mail fraud, wire fraud

Back

4 facts to prove to win defamation suit...

Front

1. Statement was actually made 2. Statement is false 3. Communicated to someone other than plaintiff 4. Plaintiff must show injury from statement

Back

Public personalities

Front

Have a harder time winning because they have to prove the defendant acted with ACTUAL MALICE

Back

Defenses to criminal charges

Front

Infancy, involuntary intoxication, insanity, consent, duress, self-defense, entrapment, statute of limitations, and immunity

Back

Qualified privilege

Front

When info is legitimately needed, speaker giving it has this

Back

Wrongful death

Front

Improper killing of another

Back

Negligence per se

Front

If you break a law, they assume duty and breach

Back

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

Front

Prohibits using 2+ racketeering acts to accomplish certain goals, aimed at organized crime

Back

Alcohol and Dram Shop Laws

Front

If they are under 21 and intoxicated, whoever served them is directly liable

Back

Duty to Child Trespassers

Front

If man-made item attracts children, landowner may be liable

Back

Punitive damages

Front

Damages intended to punish the defendant for conduct that is extreme and outrageous

Back

Wife/Mail Fraud

Front

Wire and mail fraud are additional federal crimes involving the use of interstate mail, telegram, telephone, radio, or television to obtain property by deceit

Back

Hiring and retention

Front

Company can be sued if they don't check and due diligence

Back

Embezzlement

Front

Fraudulent conversion of someone else's property already in the defendant's possession

Back

Opinions

Front

Opinions are NOT defamation

Back

Shopkeeper's privilege

Front

Store may detain a person suspected of shoplifting if there is a reasonable basis for the charge and the detention is done reasonable

Back

False imprisonment

Front

The restraint of someone against their will and without reasonable cause

Back

Fraud

Front

Injuring another person by deliberate deception

Back

6th Amendment

Front

Right to a lawyer, speedy trial, impartial jury

Back

Crimes that harm businesses

Front

Larceny, fraud, embezzlement, wire/mail fraud, theft of honest services, arson

Back

Battery

Front

Touching of another person in a way that is unwanted or offensive

Back

Duty to Licensees

Front

To warn of known, but hidden dangerous conditions licensees are unlikely to discover for themselves

Back

Categories of tort law

Front

Intentional torts, negligence, strict liability

Back

Lanham Act

Front

Protection against false statements intended to hurt another's business

Back

Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Front

An intentional tort in which the harm results from extreme and outrageous conduct that causes serious emotional harm

Back

Conversion

Front

Taking/using someone's property without consent

Back

Compensatory damages

Front

Money intended to restore a plaintiff to the position she was in before the injury

Back

Trespass

Front

Intentionally entering land that belongs to someone else or remaining after being asked to leave

Back

Negligence rule

Front

1. Duty 2. Breach (acting unreasonably under the cirumstances) 3. Causation (factual and proximate) 4. Damages

Back

Fraud

Front

Deception for the purpose of taking money or property from someone

Back

Negligence

Front

Careless, but culpable

Back

Tort Law

Front

Violation of duty based on law

Back

Section 3

(18 cards)

Non-economic damages usually may not exceed...

Front

3x the economic damages or a flat cap such as $250k

Back

Ultra hazardous activities

Front

Defendants are almost always held liable for harm, plaintiff does not have to prove breach or foreseeable harm

Back

TN cap for non-economic damages is...

Front

$750k or $1M for catastrophic damages

Back

In most cases, the jury can award...

Front

Whatever seems reasonable for economic damages

Back

Comparative negligence

Front

In most states, if the plaintiff is negligent, a percentage of negligence is applied to both the defendant and the plaintiff

Back

Consumer expectation

Front

If less safe than expected the manufacturer would be liable

Back

Types of product liability

Front

- Negligent design - Negligent manufacture - Failure to warn

Back

Defenses to Negligence

Front

- Superseding cause - Contributory/comparative negligence - Assumption of the risk

Back

Damages must be...

Front

Genuine and single recovery for past, present, future

Back

Statute of Limitation

Front

Usually 1 to 5 years from when defect was discovered

Back

Modified comparative negligence

Front

- 50% Bar (0 recovery if 50% or more; reduced by % if less; TN) - 51% Bar (0 recovery if 51% or more; reduced by % if less)

Back

Tort reform

Front

About half the states have passed statutory limits on tort awards

Back

Assumption of the risk

Front

A person who voluntarily enters a situation that has an obvious danger cannot complain if she is injured - This rule applies to a situation where the danger is well-known and the participant chooses to be present

Back

Statute of Repose

Front

Absolute limit on bringing the case

Back

Defective products

Front

1. sells defective product, unreasonably dangerous, seller is in business of selling, and reaches consumer without substantial change 2. #1 is true, even if seller exercised care and has no contractual relationship with the seller

Back

A bystander, unharmed physically, may recover for emotional distress if...

Front

- She was near the scene of the injury, - Seeing injury caused immediate shock & - She is a close relative of the physically harmed victim

Back

Risk-utility

Front

- Value of the product - Gravity of the danger - Likelihood of danger - Feasibility of a safer design - Adverse consequences of alternative design

Back

Contributory negligence

Front

In a few states, if the plaintiff is AT ALL negligent, he cannot recover damages from the defendant

Back