NO Plaguarism

Ut{lT TWO ll1l,e Connercial Environment -To view a sample answer for Case Problem 10-6, go to Appendix F at the end of this rext. l0-7. Conditions of Performance. James Maciel leased an apart- ment in Regent Vi11age, a university-owned housing facil- ity for Regent University (RU) students in Virginia Beach, Virglnia. The lease ran until the end of the laii semester. Maciel had an option to renew the lease semester by semes- ter as long as he maintained his status as an RU student. When Maciel completed his coursework for the spring semester, he told RU that he intended to withdraw. The university told him that he could stay in the apartment until May 31, the fina1 day of the spring semester. Maciel asked for two additional weeks, but the university denied the request. OnJune l, RU changed the locks on rhe apart- ment. Maciel entered through a window and e-mailed the university that he planned to stay "for another one or two weeks." Charged in a Vlrginia state court with trespass- , i.g, Maciel argued that he had "legal aurhority" ro occupy / the apartment. Was Maciel correct? Explain. lMaciel v. / Commonwealth, - S.E.2d _ (Va.App. 20I1)l V l0-8. Damages. Before buying a house in Rockaway, NewJersey, Dean and Donna Testa hired Ground Systems, Inc. (GSI), to inspect the sewage and water disposal system. Steve Austin, the GSI inspector, told Dean that the system included a tank, a distribution box, pipes, and a leach fie1d (where contaminants are removed from the sewage). Austins writ- ten report described a split system with a watertight septic tank and a separate kitchen and laundry wastewarer tank. The Testas bought the house. Ten years later, when they tried to sell the house, a prospective buyer withdrew from the sale after receiving an inspecrion repoft that evaluated the septic system as "unsatisfactoDr" The Testas arranged for the installation of a new system. During the work, Dean saw that the o1d system was not as Austln had described- there was no distribution box or leach fie1d, and there was only one tank, which was nor warertight. The Testas filed a suit in a NewJersey state courr against GSI, alleging breach of contract. if GSI was liable, what would be the measure ,.1 thc .lrrn.rftll ErL,l i (ilr;75lsfenil,,cJodNJ ::Ol :_ 7{l 3.1 43i r)rll I )l l0-9. ifrffil A Question of Ethics. Conditions. King County, lE5ll Washington, hired Fran'h Coluccio Construction Co. (FCCC) to dct as general contractor for a public worhs project iarclving the construction of a small utilig tunnel under the Duwamish Waterway. FCCC hired Donald B. Murphy Contractors, Inc. (DBM), os a subcontractor DBM 1.

ds respon- sible Jor constructing an access shaJt at the eatern end oJ the tunnel. Problems arose dunng consttuction, including a "blow- in" oJ the access shaJt that caused it to fll with water, soil, and debns. FCCC and DBM incurred substantial expenses t'rom the repairs and deLays. Under the prqect contract, Kng County was supposed to buy an insurance policy to "insure against physical loss or damage by penls included under an'All-Risk' Builder's Rish policy." Any claim under this policy was to be fled through the insured. King County, which had general property damage insurance, didnot obtain an all-iskbuilder's nsk pohcy. For the Losses attnbutable to the blow-in, FCCC and DBM submitted bullder nsk claims, which tht county denied. FCCC fled a suit in a Washington state court agdinst King County, alleging, among other claims, breach oJ contract. [Frank Coluccio Construction Co. v King County, 136 Wash.App. 751, 150 P.3d 1147 (Diy. 1 2007)l L King Countys property damage policy specifically excluded, at the county's request, coverage of tunnels. The county drafted its conrracr with FCCC Lo require the all-risk bullders nsk policy and authorize itself to "sponsor" claims. When FCCC and DBM flled their ciaims, the county secretly colluded wirh irs properry damage insurer to deny pa)./ment. What do these facts indicate about rhe county's ethics and 1ega1 liability in this situation? 2. Could DBM, as a third party ro rhe contract berween King County and FCCC, maintain an action on the con- tract against King County? Discuss. i, All-risk insurance is a promise to pay on the "fortuitous" happening of a loss or damage from any cause except those that are specifically excluded. Pa).,rnent usually is not made on a loss that, at the time the insurance was obtained, the claimant subjectively trcrew would occur. If a loss results from faulty workmanship on the part o[ a contractor, should the obligation to pay under an all-risk policy be discharged? Explaln. l0-10.ffi Video Question. Midnight Run. lEll e....r the video using the instructions provided below to answer the following questions. l. Eddie (Joe Pantoliano) andJack (Robert De Niro) nego- tiate a contract forJack to find the Duke, a mob accoun- tant who embezzled funds, and bring him back for trial. Assume that the contract ls valid. If Jack breaches the contract by failing to bring in the Duke, what kinds of remedies, 7[ any, carl Eddie seek? Explain your answer. 2. Would the equitable remedy of specific performance be available to eitherJack or Eddie in the event of a breach? Why or why not? 3. Now assume that the contract between Eddie and Jack is unenforceable. Nevertheless, Jack performs his side of the bargain (brings in the Duke). Does Jack have any lega1 recourse in this situation? Why or why not? -To watch this video, go to ll,ww.cengagebrain.com and register the access code that came with your new book or log in to your existing account. Select the link for either the "Business Law Digital Video Library Online Access" or "Business l-aw CourseMate," and then click on "Complete Video List" to find the video for thls chapter (Video 57). FTTN