Happy Harry's New-to-You Vehicle Dealership (Ringoes, New Jersey) Happy Harry's New-to-You Vehicle Dealership is a massive showroom and inventory...

I attached the file, all of the question are in here.

Happy Harry’s New-to-You Vehicle Dealership (Ringoes, New Jersey)

Happy Harry’s New-to-You Vehicle Dealership is a massive showroom and inventory located in Ringoes, New Jersey. “Happy Harry” is actually a fictional name – Happy Harry’s New-to-You Vehicle Dealership is run by Susan Grouse, a highly-educated and savvy businessperson who has been in the used car dealer business for her entire life. Happy Harry was the name of her childhood cat, who always looked grumpy – it is something of an inside joke. She is in her early seventies and is thinking of retiring soon, but she isn’t sure whether she really wants to or what she would do with her time. Susan is looking for a fresh-out-of-business school smart person to come work for her so that she can groom that person in the business and, at the very least, reduce her day-to-day involvement. She currently has thirty employees, no union, no individual contracts of employment, and no employee handbook. (Questions 1 through 10 are based on this scenario – be sure to incorporate facts given in previous questions where instructed to consider “all previous facts.”)

1. Susan is angry that three of her highest producing employees have been lured away by a competing dealership ... she wants to know if she can sue them for breach of contract or sue the competing dealership for theft. What do you advise her?

a.You can’t sue the employees because they were employees at will, but you can sue the competing dealership for defamation

b.           Youcan’tsuetheemployeesbecausetheywerefreetoquitatanytime,butyoucan require they now sign noncompete agreements

c.You can sue the employees for tortious interference with business relations, but the competing dealership has free speech rights to offer the employees’ jobs

d.           Youcansuetheemployeesfortortiousinterferencewithbusinessrelationsandthe competing dealership for negligent hiring

e.You can’t sue the employees but you can sue the competing dealership for tortious interference with business relations

2. (See all previous facts for background information.) In a fit of rage, Bob, one of the mechanics punched a customer for implying that he stole items from the car and accusing him of using old engine parts but charging him for new parts. Susan is shocked – Bob has worked there twelve years and has never even raised his voice to anyone! It turns out Bob is going through a really rough personal time right now due to a divorce. The customer is suing Bob in tort for assault and battery. What does the customer have to prove to win a tort suit against Bob?

a. Bob had a duty to the customer not to hurt him, Bob broke that duty by punching him, and that the punch caused the customer harm.

b. Bob was intentionally negligent in servicing the car and intended to profit from his actions

c. Bob has a history of violent behavior, the dealership should have known that if it took reasonable care, and the dealership should have had Bob working where he couldn’t do harm

d. Bob meant to cause the customer harm at the moment that he acted, even if he normally doesn’t act that way

e. All of the above

3. (See all previous facts, especially the previous question.) In a fit of rage, Bob, one of the mechanics punched a customer for implying that he stole items from the car and accusing him of using old engine parts but charging him for new parts. Susan is shocked – Bob has worked there twelve years and has never even raised his voice to anyone! It turns out Bob is going through a really rough personal time right now due to a divorce.

Now, the customer is suing Happy Harry’s dealership for the tort of negligent hiring and/or negligent supervision. What does the customer have to prove to win a tort suit against Happy Harry’s dealership?

a. Bob had a duty to the customer not to hurt him, Bob broke that duty by punching him, and that the punch caused the customer harm.

b. Bob was intentionally negligent in taking care of the car and intended to profit from his actions

c. Bob has a history of violent behavior, the dealership should have known that if it took reasonable care, and the dealership should have had Bob working where he couldn’t do harm

d. Bob meant to cause the customer harm at the moment that he acted, even if he normally doesn’t act that way

e. All of the above

4. (See all previous facts, especially the previous two questions.) In a fit of rage, Bob, one of the mechanics punched a customer for implying that he stole items from the car and accusing him of using old engine parts but charging him for new parts. Susan is shocked – Bob has worked there twelve years and has never even raised his voice to anyone! It turns out Bob is going through a really rough personal time right now due to a divorce.

Can the customer report the action to the police and testify against Bob in a criminal trial while at the same time suing Bob and Happy Harry’s in a tort action?

a. No, torts are not crimes and they cannot both be pursued

b. Yes, torts are different from crimes but the same behavior can result in tort liability or criminal liability even though the standard of proof in the tort action is higher because it involves awarding the victim money

c. Yes, torts are different from crimes but the same behavior can result in tort liability or criminal liability even though the standard of proof in the criminal action is higher

d. No, by definition if the customer wins on the tort claim, he would also win on the criminal claim

e. Because the state prosecutes all criminal actions, the prosecutor decides whether Bob should be tried for the crime of assault and battery or whether the customer can bring a private tort action; it is not the decision of the customer.

5. (See all previous facts, especially the previous three questions.) In a fit of rage, Bob, one of the mechanics punched a customer for implying that he stole items from the car and accusing him of using old engine parts but charging him for new parts. Susan is shocked – Bob has worked there twelve years and has never even raised his voice to anyone! It turns out Bob is going through a really rough personal time right now due to a divorce. Bob is having real trouble keeping his normal good relations with everyone – customers, coworkers, and personal friends. He does best working on his own, and finds the job itself stress relieving. After visiting a doctor, Bob is diagnosed with anxiety and depression, likely aggravated by his going through a divorce right now. Bob tells Susan, his employer, all of this. Knowing what she knows, are there any laws Susan needs to take into account in disciplining and/or assigning Bob work right now?

a. The FMLA b. The FLSA c. The ADA d. Title VII

e. No laws would apply to Bob’s situation

6. (See all previous facts, especially the previous four questions.) In a fit of rage, Bob, one of the mechanics punched a customer for implying that he stole items from the car and accusing him of using old engine parts but charging him for new parts. Susan is shocked – Bob has worked there twelve years and has never even raised his voice to anyone! It turns out Bob is going through a really rough personal time right now due to a divorce.

Several members of Bob’s church have reached out to provide him with support and friendship in this tough time. As a result, Bob is becoming more involved in his religion. Susan doesn’t particularly like Bob’s church’s views on the LGBT issues and warns Bob that she is a vehement supporter of LGBT rights. If he isn’t she suggests he goes to look for a new job. If he is willing to disavow his church’s stance on LGBT issues, he is very welcome to stay on even though his work performance is slipping. Is her position legal?

a. No, it violates the ADA
b. No, it violates the First Amendment

c. No, it violates the Freedom of Religion clause in the U.S. Constitution d. No, it violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
e. Yes, it is a legal position for an at-will employer

7. (See all previous facts, especially the previous five questions.) Bob tells his pastor what is going on. In his sermon, asks Bob to speak and Bob tells everyone at his church that Susan is a supporter of LGBT rights, thinks the church position on LGBT issues is wrong, and also what she said to him about keeping his job. The church members are angry; they vow to no longer patronize Happy Harry’s. Susan sees a large dip in profits and when she finds out why, she sues Bob for defamation. Is she likely to win?

a. No, because it is a First Amendment violation to sue Bob
b. No, because she should have sued Bob’s church and pastor, not Bob c. No, because Bob was just repeating what she herself said
d. No, because the statement caused her no harm
e. Yes, she is likely to win a defamation suit

8. (See all previous facts.) In an unusual twist of events, Bob’s return to church and difficult relationship with his employer has encouraged his wife Carolyn to reunite with him. Bob refuses to disavow his church’s position on anything and files a charge with the EEOC against Happy Harry’s. After finding out that Bob has filed a charge against her, Susan is enraged. She wants Bob gone and fires him. After all that Bob’s been through, the firing is the last straw and falls into a deep depression and cannot leave the house. After exhausting his administrative remedies, in the ensuing trial, what claims are likely to be brought against Happy Harry’s?

a. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and Title VII disparate treatment (religion)

b. Defamation and Title VII disparate treatment (religion)

c. Title VII disparate treatment (religion), Title VII retaliation (religion), and loss of consortium (by Carolyn)

d. Title VII disparate treatment (religion), Title VII retaliation (religion), and negligent retention

e. There are no legitimate claims to be brought against Happy Harry’s because of employment at will and workers compensation statutes.