Can you help me answer theses 3 QUESTIONS?

Can you help me answer theses 3 QUESTIONS?

1.Miles Pizza Pub was the only pizza restaurant in Centerville, Indiana, a community consisting of approximately 10,000 residents. When Allen

moved to Centerville, he noticed that Miles was extremely successful, and sought to create his own pizza parlor, Allen's Pizza. To get an

edge over Miles, Allen published an advertisement in the local newspaper stating that Miles Pizza sponsored another town's minor league

football team, the Richmond Badgers. The citizens of Centerville were outraged to hear such news as the town was extremely devoted to the

local minor league football team, the Centerville Warriors. Miles lost significant revenue, and over half of his consumer base. Consequently,

Miles sued Allen for defamation, as he had never supported nor sponsored the Richmond Badgers. The court found Allen guilty of defamation,

and ordered that Allen compensate Miles for damages that Miles had incurred.

A.But what if the facts of the case were different? Select each set of facts below that could change the outcome of the case.

Instead of publishing the advertisement in a newspaper, Allen verbally told a close friend, Jerry, that Miles had sponsored Centerville's

rival minor league football team. But neither the prosecutor nor defendant ever determined whether Jerry shared this statement with others

B.Instead of publishing the advertisement in the newspaper, Allen spreads a rumor by word of mouth that Miles has a communicable

disease. This rumor spreads, and Miles loses three-fourths of his customer base.

C.Instead of publishing the advertisement, Allen tells a close friend that Allen is a slob.

D.Allen has found evidence, billing records and email communications, that reveal that Miles' Pizza was in fact a secret sponsor of the

Richmond Badgers.

2.Owens Inc. was a business that sought revenue by buying coffee beans from producers in Latin American countries, and then packaging and

distributing the beans in the U.S. To maximize profits, Owens Inc. bought both the highly reputed Arabica beans and the cheaper Robusta

beans. Owens Inc. would often mix the Robusta with the Arabica beans, but advertise the coffee beans as pure Arabica beans. This would

allow Owens Inc. to benefit from the higher market prices of the rarer Arabica coffee. Starbucks entered into a ten-year contract with Owens

Inc. to buy their marketed Arabica beans. However, on further inspection, Starbucks discovered that Owens Inc. had been misrepresenting the

quality of their coffee beans. Consequently, Starbucks sought to terminate their contract with Owens Inc. A U.S. district court heard their case,

and the court found that their contract lacked legal assent, and that Owens Inc. was required to pay for damages, including the money

Starbucks had spent on Owens's coffee beans.

A.But what if the facts of the case were different? Select each set of facts below that could change the power of that court to hear the case.

Instead of Owens' diluting the quality of Arabica coffee beans, the producers that supplied Owens with coffee beans had laced the Arabica

beans with Robusta, but marketed them to Owens as pure Arabica. Owens had no knowledge that this had occurred, and Starbucks still

discovered that the Arabica beans were impure.

B.Starbucks had been informed by Owens that Owens had laced its marketed Arabica coffee beans with Robusta beans.

C.Owens intended to deceive Starbucks as well as other companies with whom it conducted business.

D.Rather than Owens' lacing the Arabica coffee beans with Robusta beans, the producers that supplied Owens with coffee beans had mixed

their Arabica beans with Robusta beans, and marketed them to Owen as pure Arabica. However, the court found that Owens could have

discovered that this was occurring by using reasonable care.

3.Alex worked as a programmer for the GPS device and phone application known as MyWaze. He signed a covenant not to compete with

MyWaze. However, when he received an offer by Google to start an innovative GPS Google phone application, he left his job at MyWaze.

MyWaze sued Alex for breaching his contract and the covenant not to compete. The court ruled in favor of MyWaze.

But what if the facts of the case were different? Select each set of facts below that could change the outcome of the court's decision.

A.The covenant to not compete was created in the state of California.

B.The court found that Alex had signed the covenant not to compete in an adhesion contract. That is, upon being hired, Alex was forced to

either sign or be immediately fired from MyWaze.

C.Less than one week passed during the time that Alex quit his job at MyWaze and went to work for Google, and according to the covenant

to not compete, employees of MyWaze had to wait at least 6 weeks before working for a potential competitor.

D.Rather than going to work on creating a GPS Application for Google, Alex was hired to be a programmer for Google's e-mail system.