100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached 4.6 TrustPilot
logo-home
Exam (elaborations)

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

Rating
-
Sold
-
Pages
9
Grade
A+
Uploaded on
29-03-2025
Written in
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

Show more Read less
Institution
LEGL2700...
Course
LEGL2700...

Content preview

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

Written for

Institution
LEGL2700...
Course
LEGL2700...

Document information

Uploaded on
March 29, 2025
Number of pages
9
Written in
2024/2025
Type
Exam (elaborations)
Contains
Questions & answers

Subjects

$12.49
Get access to the full document:

100% satisfaction guarantee
Immediately available after payment
Both online and in PDF
No strings attached

Get to know the seller
Seller avatar
ARVEX

Also available in package deal

Thumbnail
Package deal
LEGL 2700 EXAM PACK WITH COMPLETE SOLUTIONS
-
5 2025
$ 75.95 More info

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
ARVEX stuvia
View profile
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
7
Member since
10 months
Number of followers
0
Documents
2867
Last sold
2 months ago

0.0

0 reviews

5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0

Recently viewed by you

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their tests and reviewed by others who've used these notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No worries! You can instantly pick a different document that better fits what you're looking for.

Pay as you like, start learning right away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and aced it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Frequently asked questions