Legal Application Assignment 2
Agency Law and Business Formation
The dumping of ship wastes just off the Florida coast within the United States water is in defiance of a number of federal and state laws. For example, companies are expected to acquire permits from the Environmental Protection Agency in order to release pollutants into the passable waters of the United States. It is the role of the permits holders to monitor their discharges and present a report to the authorities- companies that violate their permits are penalized by the Environmental Protection Agency. The company has been taking order from Sam Martin and this makes the company liable for violation of United States and Florida Law. The company should have a permit that is only regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency, although Sam Martin should take part in supervising the discharge of the waste products (Emerson, 2004).
Patriot cruises is liable in tort to private property owners along the Florida coast for damages to their private beaches contaminated by the waste. Under direct liability, the principle is directly responsible for his agent’s torts for giving improper orders that causes the tort to happen.
Thomas works for North Country National Airport, therefore, he qualifies as an agent, while the airport qualifies as the principle. Thomas is authorized to act for the airport. The airport is the principle since Thomas derives authority from the airport.
The airport is required to honor Thomas’ promise to the owner of the equipment. Indirect liability has it that the agent’s negligence is charged to the principle, even though the principle has committed no act of negligence, as long as the agent is acting for the principle in the range of his service. Indirect liability is found on the common law set of guidelines that requires the superior to respond (Emerson, 2004).
Employment Law and Labor Management Relations
I should not ask an interviewee the following subjects regarding his or her physical ability to do the job: whether he or she has ever had a key sickness in the previous five years, whether he or she has any disabilities, whether he or she has ever been hospitalized, whether he or she was missing from work because of sickness last year, whether he or she has ever been treated for a therapeutic condition, whether he or she is taking any prearranged prescription, or whether he or she has ever been treated for drug dependence. I should ask the following questions: whether he or she can raise a fifty pound mass and transmit it 100 yards as projected by this task, whether he or he can carry out the indispensable purposes of the task, and whether he or she can exhibit how he or she would carry out the following task (Karen 531).
As an employer, I would give the job to the most qualified applicant. In this scenario, the applicant who has a disability happens to be the most qualified regardless of his or her chronic back pain- I will hire the interviewee with the disability since he or she has better qualifications.
The business Allison works for is liable for sexual harassment since the employer is aware of the harassment- Allison had reported the matter to the owner of the business. Literature review has it that an employer who fails to acquire suitable and successful counteractive action will face legal responsibility.
According to Allison claim, the owner is depicted as having not done anything after Allison presented the issue- sexual harassment. If the owner was acting rationally, he was supposed to punctually address this issue, sexual harassment complaint, by investing the charges and adopting the pertinent counteractive proceedings.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act forbid prejudice in employment based on citizenship status. A qualified alien authorized to work cannot be denied work. However, the Immigration Reform and Control Act give a predilection in employing a United States citizen over an alien if the two persons are evenly competent. The Exclusive Excursions should, therefore, hire a citizen of the United States as depicted by the Immigration Reform and Control Act (Karen 580).
The employer is required to treat all applicants equally- the work should go to the most qualified applicant. The employer should not base his or her employment decisions on incapability to perform non-essential purposes of the work. The employer should, therefore, assess whether the disabled applicant can perform the essential functions of the work. If the disabled applicant is the most qualified, the employer should provide the applicant with reasonable accommodations.
Crimes, Torts, & Standard of Care
A child fell through and suffered from exposure and frost bite- at Brighton Arms Hotel’s pond. The hotel is liable for the child’s injuries if the following conditions were not met; failing to close the pond during the winter months, as well as failing to use warning signs in order to create awareness. The hotel should have practically dogged that there were times that the kids would be endangered by the thin ice. If the hotel had put into practice the following conditions, then the hotel would not be liable for the child’s injuries (Peterson 1987).
A restaurant patron was, deeply, engaged in a conversation while descending the steps from a second-storey restaurant. An obstacle on the second step caused her slip and fall, resulting in injuries- she failed to survey the steps. The rule of comparative negligence will have an impact to both parties. A comparative negligence is a tort decree for allotting compensation when both parties are at least somewhat at blunder (Marshall, 1999). The restaurant was negligent for failing to remove the obstacle and the same case applies to the restaurant patron for being careless to watch her steps. Her negligence will cost the restaurant since the damage cost is shared by both parties. According to this scenario, both the restaurant patron and the restaurant are held responsible for the damage; therefore, the cost is shared between the two parties.
If the restaurant was in state where the rule was contributory negligence, the outcome of the case could have held the restaurant patron as being totally or moderately accountable for the resulting damage even though the restaurant was involved in the mishap. In order for this to happen, the restaurant must be able to verify the contributory negligence claim (Peterson 1987).
The legal status of each of the following class of people in the hotel industry
A hotel guest is an invitee.
A person who comes to the hotel to meet a friend who is a guest of the hotel is an invitee
A person who enters the hotel restaurant only to use the bathroom is an invitee
A person who enters the hotel to attend a meeting being held in a room rented for the day by the employer is a licensee.
A person who enters the hotel to buy a gift in the lobby gift shop is an invitee.
A person who enters the hotel to take a shortcut through the building is a trespasser.
A person who enters the hotel to rob a guest is a trespasser.
A patron of a restaurant who left his coat and returns the net day to retrieve it is a licensee (Peterson 1987).
References
Emerson, R. W. (2004).Business law. Hauppage, NY: Barron’s
Cournoyer, N.G., Marshall, A.G., & Morris, K. (1999). Hotel, Restaurant, and Travel Law: A Preventive Approach, Albany, NY: Delmar.
Peterson, J.A. (1987).Risk management for park, recreation, and leisure services. Champaign,
IL: Management Learning Laboratories.
Karen, L.M. & Anthony, G.M. (2008). Hotel, Restaurant, and Travel Law: A preventative
approach, Seventh Edition.
