Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
1
CHAPTER 1
LAW AND LEGAL REASONING
ANSWER TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTION
IN THE FEATURE
ETHICS TODAY—CRITICAL THINKING QUESTION
When is the Supreme Court justified in not following the doctrine of stare decisis? The
doctrine of stare decisis requires a court to adhere to precedent to promote predictability and
consistency. To overcome the doctrine of stare decisis a precedent must be more than just
wrongly decided. There has to be a special reason to overrule it. It is more likely that the
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS IN THE REVIEWING FEATURE
AT THE END OF THE CHAPTER
1A. Parties
The automobile manufacturers are the plaintiffs, and the state of California is the defendant.
2A. Remedy
The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction, an equitable remedy, to prevent the state of California
3A. Source of law
2 UNIT ONE: THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS
4A. Finding the law
Federal statutes are found in the United States Code, and California statutes are published in
the California Code. You would look in these sources to find the relevant state and federal
statutes.
ANSWER TO DEBATE THIS QUESTION IN THE REVIEWING FEATURE
AT THE END OF THE CHAPTER
Under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts are obligated to follow the precedents
established in their jurisdictions unless there is a compelling reason not to. Should U.S.
courts continue to adhere to this common law principle, given that our government now
regulates so many areas by statute? Both England and the U.S. legal systems were
constructed on the common law system. The doctrine of stare decisis has always been a major
ANSWERS TO ISSUE SPOTTERS
AT THE END OF THE CHAPTER
1A. Under what circumstances might a judge rely on case law to determine the intent
and purpose of a statute? Case law includes courts’ interpretations of statutes, as well as
2A. After World War II, several Nazis were convicted of “crimes against humanity” by
an international court. Assuming that these convicted war criminals had not disobeyed
any law of their country and had merely been following their government’s orders, what
law had they violated? Explain. At the time of the Nuremberg trials, “crimes against humanity”
CHAPTER 1: LAW AND LEGAL REASONING 3
ANSWERS TO BUSINESS SCENARIOS
AT THE END OF THE CHAPTER
1–1A. Binding versus persuasive authority
A decision of a court is binding on all inferior courts. Because no state’s court is inferior to any
other state’s court, no state’s court is obligated to follow the decision of another state’s court on
1-2A. Sources of law
(a) The U.S. Constitution—The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. A
law in violation of the Constitution, no matter what its source, will be declared unconstitutional
and will not be enforced.
1-3A. Stare decisis
Stare decisis is a Latin phrase meaning “to stand on decided cases.” In the King’s Courts of
medieval England, it became customary for judges to refer to past decisions (precedents) in
deciding cases involving similar issues. Over time, because of application of the doctrine of
4 UNIT ONE: THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF BUSINESS
ANSWERS TO BUSINESS CASE PROBLEMS
AT THE END OF THE CHAPTER
1–4A. SPOTLIGHT ON AOL—Common law
The doctrine of stare decisis is the process of deciding case with reference to former decisions,
or precedents. Under this doctrine, judges are obligated to follow the precedents established
within their jurisdiction.
In this problem, the enforceability of a forum selection clause is at issue. There are two
1-5A. BUSINESS CASE PROBLEM WITH SAMPLE ANSWER—Reading Citations
The court’s opinion in this case—Equal Employment Opportunity Comission v. Autozone, Inc.,
1-6A. A QUESTION OF ETHICS—The common law tradition
(a) Your answer to these questions and the reasons for those answers will likely
follow one of the three schools of jurisprudential thought discussed in Chapter 1. In other
words, your reasoning would indicate how you personally view the nature of ethics and the law.
If your sentiments are similar to those of the positivist school, you would have little difficulty.
Your answers would include that regardless of the necessity, or even the ethicality, of the men’s
CHAPTER 1: LAW AND LEGAL REASONING 5
ANSWERS TO LEGAL REASONING GROUP ACTIVITY QUESTIONS
AT THE END OF THE CHAPTER
1–7A. Court opinions
(a) A majority opinion is a written opinion outlining the views of the majority of the
judges or justices deciding a particular case. A concurring opinion is a written opinion by a
judge or justice who agrees with the conclusion reached by the majority of the court but not
necessarily with the legal reasoning that led the conclusion.
(b) A concurring opinion will voice alternative or additional reasons as to why the
