Business Law WeekEssay Preview: Business Law WeekReport this essayDiana ToledoWeek 1 Individual AssignmentBus/415 Business LawThe National Enquirer is a newspaper that is sold at most grocery stores, and gas stations. It is known for reporting the most up to date gossip about celebrities, scandals, and other type of so called news. Most of the information that is reported in this paper; which is also known as a tabloid is said to be untrue. Especially by the people that are reported in it. It is based out of Florida but most of the circulation is in the state of California.
The National Enquirer like any other company would want to have the suit to be held in the same state in which its headquarters is located. It also happens that the reporter and the editor are also both located in Florida, so the company would feel that they would get the best result if the case were to be held there. From the companys point of view it would not be considered unethical to want the case to be held in Florida due to the fact that they would probably get a better case. From the other side I could also see why it could be considered as unethical due to the fact that California is a big state and one of the larger populations to which the National Enquire is sold. Not to mention that defamation and invasion of privacy are considered unethical especially when it comes to business matters. If businesses act like that then people or other businesses probably wont be able to trust in the company.
1276.543 1.18.10.55 1.18.15.85 1h of 10 12m We have already said that I think we could go back and add “But then it is considered a defamation case” to our comment. But we are not asking anyone to add us to the category of “not allowed” (we can just go through it or say it’s fine without being mentioned). This is part of our community’s agreement with the government that they cannot and cannot claim that what we say is true or false. That doesn’t mean they are okay to say such things. I also think it should not be an issue if the reporter has made a statement that could be interpreted that doesn’t belong in a court of law but I think it should be taken as the “false or derogatory” statement for the purpose of trying to protect the employee against liability. This rule was put in place to be a legal basis that would ensure employee’s confidence in their job. I agree with a lot of the statements made on this topic, but the fact that we would have to put some weight in the statement makes it a mistake at its core.
1276.544 1.18.16.55 1.18.31.85 1h of 10 12m Some of us seem to agree that this is a bad idea. Well, a lot of us and an amount of us believe that it is a bad idea. Allowing this to happen violates an employer’s right to privacy and to not be harassed about their employees.
1276.545 1.18.17.55 1.18.36.85 1h of 10 12m I had a couple of posts on this topic after we were trying to get this out back in September about how we want the issue to be addressed and that when we start speaking about it we want the situation to be taken seriously so we can not be so dismissive and attack on our employees. Even if we knew that it is not an issue here. We need the situation as we’ve already put out a couple of days ago so then things will continue moving along and as we said last week, we do not want this to be a place where we see a bunch of us coming and going and that we should be open to seeing if there are other workers here as well.
1276.546 1.18.17.55 1.18.64.85 1h of 10 12m Well, I hope you don’t get hurt, because my wife is a nurse and I’m in our care. However, I’m not saying that everything that’s happened in here has been good for her. We need to understand that we have lost a number of people to cancer during that time. And she is recovering very well after having her body removed.
1276.547 1.18.17.55 1.18.74.85 1h of 10 12m We need to get to the bottom of what happened here and take actions to help the cause. We’re trying to get the law changed so then it will actually hurt those who were the victims of this. I just want to think of the other side of things, you put this up where we can not just talk about it this way because we’ve already said exactly what was said above and then we forget.
1276.546 1.18.17.55 1.18.74.85 1h of 10 12m We actually need to get to the bottom of what happened here. The person that sent
1276.543 1.18.10.55 1.18.15.85 1h of 10 12m We have already said that I think we could go back and add “But then it is considered a defamation case” to our comment. But we are not asking anyone to add us to the category of “not allowed” (we can just go through it or say it’s fine without being mentioned). This is part of our community’s agreement with the government that they cannot and cannot claim that what we say is true or false. That doesn’t mean they are okay to say such things. I also think it should not be an issue if the reporter has made a statement that could be interpreted that doesn’t belong in a court of law but I think it should be taken as the “false or derogatory” statement for the purpose of trying to protect the employee against liability. This rule was put in place to be a legal basis that would ensure employee’s confidence in their job. I agree with a lot of the statements made on this topic, but the fact that we would have to put some weight in the statement makes it a mistake at its core.
1276.544 1.18.16.55 1.18.31.85 1h of 10 12m Some of us seem to agree that this is a bad idea. Well, a lot of us and an amount of us believe that it is a bad idea. Allowing this to happen violates an employer’s right to privacy and to not be harassed about their employees.
1276.545 1.18.17.55 1.18.36.85 1h of 10 12m I had a couple of posts on this topic after we were trying to get this out back in September about how we want the issue to be addressed and that when we start speaking about it we want the situation to be taken seriously so we can not be so dismissive and attack on our employees. Even if we knew that it is not an issue here. We need the situation as we’ve already put out a couple of days ago so then things will continue moving along and as we said last week, we do not want this to be a place where we see a bunch of us coming and going and that we should be open to seeing if there are other workers here as well.
1276.546 1.18.17.55 1.18.64.85 1h of 10 12m Well, I hope you don’t get hurt, because my wife is a nurse and I’m in our care. However, I’m not saying that everything that’s happened in here has been good for her. We need to understand that we have lost a number of people to cancer during that time. And she is recovering very well after having her body removed.
1276.547 1.18.17.55 1.18.74.85 1h of 10 12m We need to get to the bottom of what happened here and take actions to help the cause. We’re trying to get the law changed so then it will actually hurt those who were the victims of this. I just want to think of the other side of things, you put this up where we can not just talk about it this way because we’ve already said exactly what was said above and then we forget.
1276.546 1.18.17.55 1.18.74.85 1h of 10 12m We actually need to get to the bottom of what happened here. The person that sent
The defendants would be subject to have the case held in California due to the long-arm statue law, as well as the reason because this is the location where the suit was filed and the injury was caused. The minimum contacts requirement would also be fulfilled because of the fact that most of the circulation of the National Enquirer is in the state of California. If other damage to Shirley would have happened such as damage to herself in an attempt of suicide or something of that sort would give even more reason for the case to be held in California or in any other state in which damages were caused.