INSTRUCTION MANUAL FOR
Law for Business 15th Edition by
Eric L. Richards, A. James Barnes, Timothy A. Lemper
,Chapter 1-47 (All Chapters Verified)
CHAPTER 1: LAW AND LEGAL REASONING
LECTURE OUTLINE
1. Discuss the Twisdale case that opens this chapter. It provides an interesting vehicle for
discussing the functions of law and legal interpretation.
a. Have your students identify the various functions of the law and then discuss which
specific functions are furthered by this antiretaliation aspects of the Civil Rights statute.
b. In the context of legal interpretation, the court found that Twisdale did seem to be
protected based on the literal language of the statute. However, it looked beyond the
plain meaning to reject his claim. Specifically, the court believed that interpreting the
law in a manner that would protect him from retaliation would undermine the purpose of
the statute. It is conceivable that the court is motivated by public policy concerns as
well.
c. What do your students think of courts who do look at intent and public policy? Use this
as a lead-in for a discussion of legal jurisprudence.
2. Question students about their definitions of ―law.‖ Make certain they understand the
importance of law in all aspects of our lives.
3. Discuss the various functions that law serves in society. You might do this by having the
students identify some of them.
a. Discuss the conflicts that arise between and among the various functions of law. For
example, there often are conflicts between the goals of individual freedom and achieving
social justice. Note the problems that arise when there is no clear consensus on what is
just.
b. Ask the students if they think that law ever is ―overused.‖ They are likely to cite
numerous examples. For instance, this might be a time to talk about the product liability
cases that are regularly in the headlines. Perhaps the case involving the woman who
burned herself with coffee from McDonald’s would be appropriate here.
, c. Have the students discuss what it means to have the law maintain order. You might ask
students if maintaining order means maintaining the status quo. This can lead to a
discussion of legal realism and views that law is used by those in power to retain their
power.
4. There is a tendency for people to think of law as imposing duties without considering how it
establishes and preserves rights. Talk about how our system tries to match rights with
corresponding duties.
a. Explain how duties, rights, and privileges make up substantive law.
b. Explain that procedural law provides the framework within which substantive laws are
created and enforced. Point out that Chapters 2 and 4 offer a more detailed discussion of
procedural law.
5. Ask the students to think of an example of a duty imposed by substantive law that might
violate some moral or ethical belief. This might be a good time to talk about the various
schools of legal jurisprudence. Have them speculate how a legal positivist would differ from
a legal sociologist or natural law theorist in handling such situations.
6. Contrast criminal law with civil law.
a. Point out that society considers it much worse to be convicted of a crime than to be held
civilly liable. Explain how, as a result, there are more exacting procedural safeguards to
protect a defendant in a criminal trial than in a civil trial.
b. Note the difference between compensatory damages and punitive damages. Discuss the
current uproar over punitive damages and the Supreme Court’s attempt to rein them in.
See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Campbell, 123 S.Ct. 1513 (U.S. Sup.
Ct. 2003) (establishing guideposts for calculating punitive damages). Punitive damages
are discussed further in Chapter 6.
c. Point out that often one can be subject to sanctions under both criminal and civil laws
without violating the proscription against ―double jeopardy.‖ Find out if the students
think that punitive damages in a civil trial, coupled with fines in a criminal trial,
constitute a type of double jeopardy.
Marinello v. United States
Marinello was charged with the crime of corruptly impeding the due administration of the Tax
Code after he engaged in several activities that underreported his taxable income. However, the
U.S. Supreme Court overturned his criminal conviction because Marinello was unaware that he
was under IRS investigation at the time of his activities. Citing the need to construe criminal
, statutes narrowly, the Court ruled that the particular statute—the Omnibus Clause—did not cover
all activities that underreported income. The Court believed that the statute covered a narrower
range of activities aimed directly at thwarting the activities of investigations when the taxpayer
knew or should have known an investigation was underway.
Points for Discussion: This case is placed in the text as an example of the general rules
underlying criminal law. Specifically, a person generally cannot be convicted of a crime unless
he or she violates a statute. However, such statutes must be objectively clear to a reasonable
person. This Government’s interpretation of this statute was believed to grant the Government
too much discretion in determining what constituted a crime.
7. The brief introduction to our legal system should be a review for most students.
a. The constitutional law material is more heavily discussed in Chapter 4. An argument can
be made for it to be presented immediately following this chapter. However, we believe
students should first review Chapter 2’s discussion of the dispute resolution system.
b. Talk about the role of the courts in determining the constitutionality of legislation. Do
they believe this gives the courts too much power?
c. Explain the relationship between state laws and federal laws. Make certain the students
understand that state laws may not violate the federal constitution and must be consistent
with federal statutes.
Henry Schein v. Archer & White Sales
The Federal Arbitration Act provides that parties may, through their power to contract, agree that
their disputes will be arbitrated. In addition, the Act allows those same parties to agree that an
arbitrator, rather than a court, will determine whether that arbitration clause applies to any
particular dispute they may have. However, several federal appellate courts carved out a ―wholly
groundless‖ exception to the latter rule by which they allowed courts to conclude that arbitration
was not appropriate when the court believed the claim of arbitrability was groundless. In this
case, the U.S. Supreme Court, citing both the statute and Supreme Court precedent, ruled that the
―wholly groundless‖ exception was impermissible because it contradicted the statute.
Points for Discussion: This case is an example of the limits on the judiciary’s discretion under
the common law. It illustrates that in the hierarchy of laws, legislative law is superior to judge-
made law. It also illustrates the role of precedent in interpreting statutes.
8. The material on statutory interpretation can be extremely important in laying the foundation
for how lawyers think. More importantly, it teaches students valuable critical thinking skills.
Take the students through the process for interpreting statutes. You may discuss statutory
interpretation and legal jurisprudence together. Note how positivists often have problems
Law for Business 15th Edition by
Eric L. Richards, A. James Barnes, Timothy A. Lemper
,Chapter 1-47 (All Chapters Verified)
CHAPTER 1: LAW AND LEGAL REASONING
LECTURE OUTLINE
1. Discuss the Twisdale case that opens this chapter. It provides an interesting vehicle for
discussing the functions of law and legal interpretation.
a. Have your students identify the various functions of the law and then discuss which
specific functions are furthered by this antiretaliation aspects of the Civil Rights statute.
b. In the context of legal interpretation, the court found that Twisdale did seem to be
protected based on the literal language of the statute. However, it looked beyond the
plain meaning to reject his claim. Specifically, the court believed that interpreting the
law in a manner that would protect him from retaliation would undermine the purpose of
the statute. It is conceivable that the court is motivated by public policy concerns as
well.
c. What do your students think of courts who do look at intent and public policy? Use this
as a lead-in for a discussion of legal jurisprudence.
2. Question students about their definitions of ―law.‖ Make certain they understand the
importance of law in all aspects of our lives.
3. Discuss the various functions that law serves in society. You might do this by having the
students identify some of them.
a. Discuss the conflicts that arise between and among the various functions of law. For
example, there often are conflicts between the goals of individual freedom and achieving
social justice. Note the problems that arise when there is no clear consensus on what is
just.
b. Ask the students if they think that law ever is ―overused.‖ They are likely to cite
numerous examples. For instance, this might be a time to talk about the product liability
cases that are regularly in the headlines. Perhaps the case involving the woman who
burned herself with coffee from McDonald’s would be appropriate here.
, c. Have the students discuss what it means to have the law maintain order. You might ask
students if maintaining order means maintaining the status quo. This can lead to a
discussion of legal realism and views that law is used by those in power to retain their
power.
4. There is a tendency for people to think of law as imposing duties without considering how it
establishes and preserves rights. Talk about how our system tries to match rights with
corresponding duties.
a. Explain how duties, rights, and privileges make up substantive law.
b. Explain that procedural law provides the framework within which substantive laws are
created and enforced. Point out that Chapters 2 and 4 offer a more detailed discussion of
procedural law.
5. Ask the students to think of an example of a duty imposed by substantive law that might
violate some moral or ethical belief. This might be a good time to talk about the various
schools of legal jurisprudence. Have them speculate how a legal positivist would differ from
a legal sociologist or natural law theorist in handling such situations.
6. Contrast criminal law with civil law.
a. Point out that society considers it much worse to be convicted of a crime than to be held
civilly liable. Explain how, as a result, there are more exacting procedural safeguards to
protect a defendant in a criminal trial than in a civil trial.
b. Note the difference between compensatory damages and punitive damages. Discuss the
current uproar over punitive damages and the Supreme Court’s attempt to rein them in.
See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Campbell, 123 S.Ct. 1513 (U.S. Sup.
Ct. 2003) (establishing guideposts for calculating punitive damages). Punitive damages
are discussed further in Chapter 6.
c. Point out that often one can be subject to sanctions under both criminal and civil laws
without violating the proscription against ―double jeopardy.‖ Find out if the students
think that punitive damages in a civil trial, coupled with fines in a criminal trial,
constitute a type of double jeopardy.
Marinello v. United States
Marinello was charged with the crime of corruptly impeding the due administration of the Tax
Code after he engaged in several activities that underreported his taxable income. However, the
U.S. Supreme Court overturned his criminal conviction because Marinello was unaware that he
was under IRS investigation at the time of his activities. Citing the need to construe criminal
, statutes narrowly, the Court ruled that the particular statute—the Omnibus Clause—did not cover
all activities that underreported income. The Court believed that the statute covered a narrower
range of activities aimed directly at thwarting the activities of investigations when the taxpayer
knew or should have known an investigation was underway.
Points for Discussion: This case is placed in the text as an example of the general rules
underlying criminal law. Specifically, a person generally cannot be convicted of a crime unless
he or she violates a statute. However, such statutes must be objectively clear to a reasonable
person. This Government’s interpretation of this statute was believed to grant the Government
too much discretion in determining what constituted a crime.
7. The brief introduction to our legal system should be a review for most students.
a. The constitutional law material is more heavily discussed in Chapter 4. An argument can
be made for it to be presented immediately following this chapter. However, we believe
students should first review Chapter 2’s discussion of the dispute resolution system.
b. Talk about the role of the courts in determining the constitutionality of legislation. Do
they believe this gives the courts too much power?
c. Explain the relationship between state laws and federal laws. Make certain the students
understand that state laws may not violate the federal constitution and must be consistent
with federal statutes.
Henry Schein v. Archer & White Sales
The Federal Arbitration Act provides that parties may, through their power to contract, agree that
their disputes will be arbitrated. In addition, the Act allows those same parties to agree that an
arbitrator, rather than a court, will determine whether that arbitration clause applies to any
particular dispute they may have. However, several federal appellate courts carved out a ―wholly
groundless‖ exception to the latter rule by which they allowed courts to conclude that arbitration
was not appropriate when the court believed the claim of arbitrability was groundless. In this
case, the U.S. Supreme Court, citing both the statute and Supreme Court precedent, ruled that the
―wholly groundless‖ exception was impermissible because it contradicted the statute.
Points for Discussion: This case is an example of the limits on the judiciary’s discretion under
the common law. It illustrates that in the hierarchy of laws, legislative law is superior to judge-
made law. It also illustrates the role of precedent in interpreting statutes.
8. The material on statutory interpretation can be extremely important in laying the foundation
for how lawyers think. More importantly, it teaches students valuable critical thinking skills.
Take the students through the process for interpreting statutes. You may discuss statutory
interpretation and legal jurisprudence together. Note how positivists often have problems
