MGMT 246 -- EXAM 1 FIRST PRACTICE TEST|UPDATED&VERIFIED|100% SOLVED|GUARANTEED SUCCESS

1. Which of the following is the best example of public law? A. A car accident that happened before class at Cal State Fullerton. B. A state statute that requires a marriage to be only one man and one woman. C. A dispute as to the interpretation of an insurance policy. D. A contract you signed in order to rent the apartment where you live. B. A state statute that requires a marriage to be only one man and one woman. 2. The definition of the word "attorney" is: A. Different from the definition of the word "lawyer." B. Someone who is studying law as a profession. C. A person who is licensed to practice law. D. The litigation or court process. C. A person who is licensed to practice law. Questions 3 and 4 are based on the following: Brees lived in California and he had never travelled out of state. Dru lived in Arizona and he had travelled to all 50 states as well as many foreign countries. They got into a dispute over a contract for work that the contract stated was to be performed in Arizona. Dru sued Brees for breach of contract (a claim based on state law). The complaint was filed in the federal court in Arizona. In response to the complaint, Brees filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that (a) no federal court could have subject matter jurisdiction a state law claim such as breach of contract and (b) the federal court in Arizona did not have personal jurisdiction over him since he was a California resident. 3. How should the court rule on the motion to dismiss based on no subject matter jurisdiction? A. The motion should be granted since the case does not involve a federal question. B. The motion should be granted since Brees lives in California. C. The motion should be denied since Dru and Brees live in different states. D. The motion should be denied since personal jurisdiction is not unreasonable. 4. How should the court rule on the motion to dismiss based on no personal jurisdiction? A. The motion should be granted since Brees lives in California. B. The motion should be granted since Brees has never travelled out of California. C. The motion should be denied since the complaint was filed in the federal court in Arizona. D. The motion should be denied since the contract stated that it was to be performed in Arizona. C. The motion should be denied since Dru and Brees live in different states. D. The motion should be denied since the contract stated that it was to be performed in Arizona. 5. Article 2 of the United States Constitution sets forth the minimum qualifications to be the President. One of those qualifications is: A. United States citizen for at least ten years. B. Natural-born citizen. C. At least 30 years old. D. Service as either a United States Senator or Governor of one of the states. B. Natural-born citizen. 6. Which of the following is a true statement about a case in federal court? A. The party who loses in the District Court then has the right to an appeal to the Court of Appeals. B. The party who loses in the District Court then has the right to an appeal to the United States Supreme Court. C. All appeals in a civil case are granted based on the court's discretion. D. All appeals in a criminal case are granted based on the court's discretion. A. The party who loses in the District Court then has the right to an appeal to the Court of Appeals. Questions 7 and 8 are based on the following: Licorice and Pizza were partners in a restaurant called "Food, Drink and More" in downtown Fullerton. Licorice was in charge of the kitchen while Pizza handled the business affairs of the restaurant. Licorice bought fresh vegetables almost daily from local farmers' markets. The restaurant's customers were made up of residents and business people in the nearby area. The restaurant engaged in some unique advertising such as advertising its availability for concerts featuring punk rock and heavy metal music. Several local residents contacted the restaurant as well as the Fullerton City Council to object to the restaurant's having these concerts due to noise and behavior issues associated with these concerts. 7. Is Pizza a stakeholder in the restaurant? A. Yes, because Pizza is one of the restaurant's partners. B. Yes, because Pizza is one of the restaurant's vendors. C. No, because Pizza is not in charge of the restaurant's kitchen. D. No, because Pizza is not one of the restaurant's customers. 8. Are the local residents who objected to the concerts stakeholders in the restaurant? A. Yes, because everyone's taste in music should be respected. B. Yes, because they are part of the community near the restaurant. C. No, because they are not owners of the restaurant. D. No, because music is a good thing. A. Yes, because Pizza is one of the restaurant's partners. B. Yes, because they are part of the community near the restaurant. 9. Which of the following is the best description of business ethics? A. Business ethics has its focus on what is right and wrong in the workplace. B. Business ethics is fundamentally different from ethics in general. C. Business ethics provides justifications for actions in the workplace that would unethical elsewhere. D. Business ethics is the functional equivalent of limitations set by the law. A. Business ethics has its focus on what is right and wrong in the workplace. 10. Lars and Ulrich agreed to submit their dispute to arbitration. The arbitrator ruled in favor of Lars. Ulrich then discovered that Lars had paid $10,000.00 to the arbitrator in exchange for ruling in Lars' favor. Ulrich made a motion to vacate the arbitration award. This motion should be: A. Granted, since the arbitrator exceeded his powers. B. Granted, on the grounds of arbitrator corruption. C. Granted, since an arbitration award is final and binding. D. Denied. B. Granted, on the grounds of arbitrator corruption. Questions 11 and 12 are based on the following: Lowe was hired by Holleran Corporation (a large international company) as an IT specialist. Her salary was $50,000/year plus a potential bonus of $10,000/year. Lowe's employment contract included the following arbitration agreement which Holleran Corporation required all of its employees to sign: "Lowe and Holleran Corporation agree that, in the event of a dispute relating to this employment contract, they will have the dispute decided by an arbitrator who will be selected jointly by Lowe and Holleran Corporation. The arbitrator cannot award more than $1,000 to the prevailing party. The arbitration hearing shall be held at a place designated by Lowe." Lowe filed a lawsuit against Holleran Corporation based on the failure to pay the $10,000 bonus to her in 2012. Holleran Corporation filed a motion to compel arbitration based on the above-stated arbitration agreement. Lowe opposed that motion on the grounds that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable. 11. Which of the following is the best example of substantive unconscionability in the arbitration agreement between Lowe and Holleran Corporation? A. Lowe's employment contract included an arbitration agreement which was required by Holleran Corporation. B. The arbitrator will be selected jointly by Lowe and Holleran Corporation. C. The arbitrator cannot award more than $1,000 to the prevailing party. D. The arbitration hearing shall be held at a place designated by Lowe. 12. Which of the following is the best example of procedural unconscionability in the arbitration agreement between Lowe and Holleran Corporation? A. Lowe's employment contract included an arbitration agreement which was required by Holleran Corporation. B. The arbitrator will be selected jointly by Lowe and Holleran Corporation. C. The arbitrator cannot award more than $1,000 to the prevailing party. D. The arbitration hearing shall be held at a place designated by Lowe. C. The arbitrator cannot award more than $1,000 to the prevailing party. A. Lowe's employment contract included an arbitration agreement which was required by Holleran Corporation.