BUSINESS LAW = PROJECT 2
***Please read the assignment and what is required first***Price of $15.00 is firm, so please do not consider the assignment if you are not willing to accept this price. Thank you.
Project 2
Bart worked for Bill as a computer engineer in Florida. Bart had been working for Bill for 15 years and had made a lot of money for Bill in Florida. Bill had many companies all over the United States.
Bart owned a home in Vero Beach Florida.
Bill called Bart from his office in Indianapolis and wanted Bart to come work for him there and offered him a Supervisor position in the company . Bill said If Bart would move there he would have employment for the rest of his life.
Bart had a son who was 17 named Albart. Bart told him to put up the house for sale and to take care of everything as he needed to move right away.
Bart moved to Indianapolis and bought a house from Ruby for $300,000. Bart liked the house because it had a one acre lot. Two weeks before settlement someone began to build a Seven Eleven on the land which the house was on by mistake.
Albart put the house up for sale in Vero for $175,000 and the house was sold in one week. Albart had signed all of the document as agent for Bart. Bart had instructed Albart not to sell the house for less than $225,000 as that was the amount owed on the house. The house was sold to Barney. At settlement Barney was informed that he would have to pay off the loan for $225,000 or $50,000 in addition to the contract price.
Ruby lives in Baltimore, Maryland and employed Steve to sell the house in Indianapolis. Ruby talked to Steve on the phone and he said he would take care of everything.
Bart went to settlement and signed the documents in New York where he was staying for a week due to the birth of his grandson.
After he got back to Indianapolis and went to move into his house, there was a Seven Eleven operating next to his house with drunks standing in the parking lot owned by Pepsi.
Bart worked for Bill for six weeks, and because of the economy Bill let Bart go. Bill said because of his great job he had done over the years he would pay Bart’s house payments. After one month Bill changed his mind and stopped the payments.
Discuss who can sue whom, under what cause of action, and for what type of damages. Where can suit be brought and under what grounds? Which state law applies?
Case Analysis Research Project
Write an extensive, comprehensive analysis of applicable court cases related to this area of law and how it applies to the set of facts.
The case analysis must be between 8-10 pages in length (excluding title page, Bibliography, tables, appendices). The 8-10 page length is a suggested length; the paper may be longer than 10 pages, but not less than 8 full pages. A paper less than 8 pages is unlikely to comprehensively cover any case analysis approved for this project and points will be deducted. There must not be large gaps between the paragraphs.
Case Analysis Content Format:
The case analysis must include the following content:
Introduction: 1-2 paragraph introduction of the case analysis.
Case Brief: A complete case brief of the case to be analyzed, using the Case Brief format described in conference area, listing the issues to be answered.
Case Background: Discussion of background of case, including discussion of previously decided related cases using the actual court opinions of other legal cases, law review journal articles, and other legal publication, articles as resources.
Analysis of Current Implications of Case: Discussion of how case decision is likely to affect current events and business law, using the actual court opinions of other legal cases, law review journal articles and legal publications as resources.
Analysis of Future Implications of Case: Discussion of how case decision is likely to affect/influence future business law and future court cases, using actual court opinions of other legal cases, law review journal articles and legal publications as resources. This is not to be your personal opinion.
Personal Opinion of Case: 1-5 paragraph discussion or your personal opinion of the case. Your opinions must be largely supported with legal rationale and legal principles, legal resources and other cases; it may not be only an emotional reaction.
Summary/Conclusion of Case: Discussion of summary, conclusions of case, excluding your personal opinion.
Bibliography: Properly formatted bibliography of at least 5 resources used in case analysis, in addition to the case citation. In other words, you are required to use a minimum of 5 legal resources + the case resource for a total of 6+ resources which must be cited in the Bibliography and body of the analysis.
Case Analysis Research Resources: The case analysis research project must include a minimum of 6 legal resources. Resources may be obtained through the Index to Legal Periodicals, LEXIS/NEXIS, and other UMUC Library databases, the Internet, the classroom Webliography websites and other methodologies for accessing information. Resources should be taken largely from law review journal articles, other legal publication articles relevant to the case topic, business journal articles relevant to the case subject, and case opinions. This is a legal case analysis so the resources need to be largely legal resources and very relevant, on-point business resources.
Newspapers (except The Wall Street Journal), textbooks, the class textbook and Wikipedia sites may not be used as resources in any section of the case analysis research project.
Refer to the UMUC Effective Writing Center and UMUC Library tutorials and examples regarding plagiarism and citations. You may access these resources via the Course Content conference in the classroom.
Case Analysis Evaluation Criteria: The case analysis will be evaluated according to the following standards:
An accurate and complete case brief; Logical integration of information to support the case analysis discussion;
Comprehensiveness/depth of research and analysis; Comprehensive, thorough analysis of case; Organizational consistency, orderly flow, relevancy, and effectiveness of sequential ideas and paragraphs to the case analysis;
Clarity of expression and presentation of ideas;
Grammatically correct construction and correct spelling and punctuation;
Timely submission of analysis on the designated due date;
Caliber, quality, and depth of research, judged in part according to the nature of the case subject matter and the bibliographic documentation
including, particularly, the use of articles from the Index to Legal Periodicals and its equivalents; Overall quality of resources used;
Adherence to the standards of formatting and documentation, including proper in-text citations and references using only APA (American Psychological Association) documentation style, or Kate Turabian documentation style(as assigned by instructor);
Proper court case citation format; Accuracy and comprehensiveness of citations;
Use of required minimum quantity of resources; Conformance with presentation format requirements; Overall quality of research and analysis.
Case Analysis Format: The paper must conform to the following presentation format:
Typed;
Not single or double spaced but 1.5 spacing, in 12-point Times New Roman or ariel fonts;
Margins not to exceed 1 in width at top/bottom/left and right margins;
Cover page to include paper title, your name, class title/section number, date;
Pagination on each page, beginning with the first page of text;
APA in-text citation style, or Kate Turabian documentation (style as assigned); Bibliography of sources used/cited in analysis.
GRADING CRITERIA
|
Criteria |
Outstanding |
Superior |
Good |
Substandard |
Failure |
|
Identification of relevant issues and legal doctrine |
5.25 points
accurately identifies all relevant issues, identifies all relevant legal doctrines, explains in depth how legal doctrines apply to relevant issues |
4.46 points
accurately identifies some relevant issues, and identifies some relevant legal /conclusion(s)doctrines, explains some points regarding how legal doctrines apply to relevant issues |
3.94 points
inaccurately identifies some/all relevant issues, inaccurately identifies some/all relevant legal /conclusion(s)doctrines, partially explains one or more points regarding how legal doctrines apply to relevant issues |
3.41 points
inaccurately identifies some/all relevant issues or does not identify any relevant issues, inaccurately identifies some/all relevant legal /conclusion(s)doctrines, partially explains one or more points regarding how legal doctrines apply to relevant issues |
2.89 points
fails to identify relevant issues; does not explain applicability of legal doctrines |
|
Application of Concepts/Development |
5.25 points
arguments or positions are well-supported with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implication and extensions of the material and concepts |
4.46 points
arguments or positions are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate student’s understanding of the material and concepts |
3.94 points
arguments are more often based on opinion or unclear views than on position grounded in the readings of material or external sources of material |
3.41 points
arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; student may resort to ad hominem attacks on the author instead of making meaningful application of the material |
2.89 points
a meaningful attempt to explain or support ideas does not exist |
|
Attention to instructions |
2.25 points
demonstrated full understanding of requirements responded to each aspect of assignment |
1.91 points
demonstrated understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment |
1.69 points
demonstrated some understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment |
1.46 points
failed to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment |
1.24 points
did not demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements |
|
Clarity, including grammar |
1.5 points
writing is clear and easy to follow; grammar and spelling are all correct; formatting gives a professional look and adds to readability |
1.28 points
most ideas are presented clearly; occasional spelling and/or grammar issues |
1.13 points
wordy; some points require rereading to understand fully; more than an occasional spelling and/or grammar |
0.98 points
unclear and difficult to understand; frequent spelling and grammar issues |
0.83 points
largely incomprehensible writing/poorly written in terms of mechanics and structure |
|
Adherence to APA Style (6th ed) |
0.75 points
no APA style errors |
0.64 points
attempts in-text citation and reference list but 1 or 2 APA style errors are present |
0.56 points
attempts in-text citation and reference listing; APA style errors are present: inconsistencies in citation usage can be found throughout the document |
0.49 points
attempts either in-text citation or reference list but omits the other |
0.41 points
no attempt at APA style |
|
Overall Score |
Outstanding |
Superior |
Good |
Substandard |
Failure |
