Case Scenarios: Bugusa, Ins
Case Scenarios: BUGusa, InsLaw 42103/31/2014Kevin B. HiattBUGusa, Inc., WorksheetScenario: WIRETIME, Inc., Advertisement Has WIRETIME, Inc., committed any torts? If so, explain.        Yes, WIRETIME, Inc. committed an intentional tort by stating BUGusa, Inc.s devices, were low quality and did not work reliably for more than one month. This can create a loss of business for BUGusa, Inc, because if any potential clients were to see that advertisement, they may turn away from BUGusa and go to WIRETIME instead. The loss of business as well as the advertisement can cause distress for the company as well as questions being raised by the clients already with BUGusa.Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Janet) Has WIRETIME, Inc. committed any torts? If so, explain.        No, I do not believe that WIRETIME, Inc. has committed any torts; however, it looks like it could be a possibility that Janet has. That is, of course, the particular city and state enforces the law of Janet’s breach in her non-compete cause agreement that she had with BUGusa, Inc. With all of that said, I do not believe that WIRETIME, Inc. has committed in crime in offering Janet a job. Scenario: WIRETIME, Inc. (Steve and Walter) Discuss any liability BUGusa, Inc., may have for Walter’s actions.
When reviewing the actions of Walter the security guard towards Steve one must realize that BUGusa will be liable for their employee’s actions, if for no other reason than the fact that they benefitted from Walter’s actions and the information he discovered. My reasoning for this stance is based in what could have been perceived by Steve as Walter’s authority (either: actual or apparent), meaning Steve thought Walter was acted under the direction of BUGusa. Therefore if Steve believed that Walter was working at the discretion of BUGusa, then I think that the case can be debated whether or not Steve perceived BUGusa as a full or partially disclosed agency. Ultimately BUGusa will be liable for Walter’s actions, due largely in part to the fact that the benefitted from his actions, and the fact that it could be debated that Walter was acting within his authority or as an agent for BUGusa.Scenario: BUGusa, Inc., Plant Parking Lot what defenses may be available to BUGusa, Inc.? Explain your answer.After reviewing the Plant Parking Lot case I don’t see any defense available to BUGusa, Inc. If crimes are happening in the company parking lot, security should be available for all employees who feel unsafe walking to their cars. If crimes are being committed on BUGUSA property we would assume they are liable for what happens whenever the employee is on company time, which puts BUGusa Company in danger of being sued. In the case it stated that lights were burnt out, BUGusa should make it their priority to ensure all light fixtures are in working order. A surveillance system may also be a good investment for BUGusa to help provide defense on their part as well as safety for their employees. If the company does not want to be responsible for crimes that occur they should make it well known to their employees and possibly hand up signs stating they are not responsible for stolen property. The case also brought up a vendor being attacked and robbed; BUGusa is going to have a lot of lawsuits if they don’t attempt to protect the safety of their employees and vendors.