100% de satisfacción garantizada Inmediatamente disponible después del pago Tanto en línea como en PDF No estas atado a nada 4,6 TrustPilot
logo-home
Examen

UGA legl 2700 Test 3 Court Cases (Roessing) Questions and Answers Verified by Experts

Puntuación
-
Vendido
-
Páginas
9
Grado
A+
Subido en
29-03-2025
Escrito en
2024/2025

UGA legl 2700 Test 3 Court Cases (Roessing) Questions and Answers Verified by Experts Ricci v. Destefano Correct Answ_-new haven administered tests to see which fire fighters would be most qualified and the results showed that whites outperformed blacks and hispanics -supreme court held that because the tests were job related and consistent with business necessity and there was no strong evidence of a disparate impact violation, the city should have certified the test results St. Louis Produce Market v. Hughes Correct Answ_The defendent was property manager for market before they relieved him of his position and sent him a separation agreement $$ as a condition precedent that he must return all company property -market sued Hughes claiming he secured the agreement through fraud and negligent misrepresentation -because he failed to return company property, though a minor condition precedent, it cut off the markets obligation to perform -sucks for Hughes

Mostrar más Leer menos
Institución
LEGL2700...
Grado
LEGL2700...

Vista previa del contenido

UGA legl 2700 Test 3 Court Cases (Roessing)
Questions and Answers Verified by Experts

Ricci v. Destefano Correct Answ_-new haven administered tests to see which fire fighters

would be most qualified and the results showed that whites outperformed blacks and hispanics

-supreme court held that because the tests were job related and consistent with business necessity

and there was no strong evidence of a disparate impact violation, the city should have certified

the test results




St. Louis Produce Market v. Hughes Correct Answ_The defendent was property manager for

market before they relieved him of his position and sent him a separation agreement $$ as a

condition precedent that he must return all company property

-market sued Hughes claiming he secured the agreement through fraud and negligent

misrepresentation

-because he failed to return company property, though a minor condition precedent, it cut off the

markets obligation to perform

-sucks for Hughes




East Capitol View Community Development Corp. v. Robinson Correct Answ_East captiol

terminated Robinsons employment early due to lack of funding but the employment contract

, stated employment would be contingent on successfully achieving all performance, which

Robinson did, so she sued

-court specifically distinguishes between objective impossibility and personal impossibility

-contracting parties have the ability to allocate known risks in the contract




Rhodes v. Davis Correct Answ_-co-own ASI and each hold 50% interest, ________ agrees to

buy out ________ ownership and he made the downpayment but then never finalized the sale

-when a contract involves unique subject matter courts may award specific performance because

there is no market equivalent

-both parties agree that specific performance was an appropriate remedy to the defendants breach

of contract




Montz v. Pilgrim Films & TV Correct Answ_-montz came up with a reality TV show

following paranormal activity and pitched the idea to NBC

-NBC partnered with pilgrim films to create ghost hunters, Montz sued alleging NBC and

pilgrim films breached an implied in fact contract to pay for the use of the reality show

-implied-in-fact agreements must contain the same elements as an express contract, including

acceptance and consideration

Escuela, estudio y materia

Institución
LEGL2700...
Grado
LEGL2700...

Información del documento

Subido en
29 de marzo de 2025
Número de páginas
9
Escrito en
2024/2025
Tipo
Examen
Contiene
Preguntas y respuestas

Temas

$12.49
Accede al documento completo:

100% de satisfacción garantizada
Inmediatamente disponible después del pago
Tanto en línea como en PDF
No estas atado a nada

Conoce al vendedor
Seller avatar
ARVEX

Documento también disponible en un lote

Thumbnail
Package deal
LEGL 2700 EXAM PACK WITH COMPLETE SOLUTIONS
-
5 2025
$ 75.95 Más información

Conoce al vendedor

Seller avatar
ARVEX stuvia
Ver perfil
Seguir Necesitas iniciar sesión para seguir a otros usuarios o asignaturas
Vendido
7
Miembro desde
10 meses
Número de seguidores
0
Documentos
2867
Última venta
2 meses hace

0.0

0 reseñas

5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0

Recientemente visto por ti

Por qué los estudiantes eligen Stuvia

Creado por compañeros estudiantes, verificado por reseñas

Calidad en la que puedes confiar: escrito por estudiantes que aprobaron y evaluado por otros que han usado estos resúmenes.

¿No estás satisfecho? Elige otro documento

¡No te preocupes! Puedes elegir directamente otro documento que se ajuste mejor a lo que buscas.

Paga como quieras, empieza a estudiar al instante

Sin suscripción, sin compromisos. Paga como estés acostumbrado con tarjeta de crédito y descarga tu documento PDF inmediatamente.

Student with book image

“Comprado, descargado y aprobado. Así de fácil puede ser.”

Alisha Student

Preguntas frecuentes