Posted: September 9th, 2022

Law Analysis

Law Analysis

The Potential Legal Problems for both Thomas and Gabriel
In this case, the issue at hand is to establish whether Gabriel commuted an offence of trespass and Arson on Thomas Property. A trespass occurs when a person or object belonging to a specific individual intentionally enters into the land or property of another person without any lawful excuse (Kyriakakis, 2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers). As such, the induvial whose land or property has been entered to has a right to sue even when no actual harm is committed. However, in some jurisdictions, Kyriakakis (2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers) explains that trespass cannot be justified unless the property or land is enclosed with the owner intends to keep off any individual or animal from entering into the premises. On the other hand, Arson occurs when an individual intentionally burns the property of another person which could be a building, structure or forest, with a severe degree of damages being experienced (Morgan & Rushton, 2015 – Research Paper Writing Help Service). In this case, Gabriel is not liable for Arson because although he dropped a cigarette that burned and chard Thomas’s peach trees, it was not intentional but an accident. However, Arson did not occur because Thomas had not fenced his property which lay between two public places. As such, Gabriel should be given the benefit of the doubt that there was no sign indicating that indeed Thomas land was on private property. As such, we can conclude that Gabriel was not liable for any crime.
In the second case, should Thomas be held liable for assaulting Thomas, the dog bite on Thomas and false imprisonment? An assault occurs when a person makes intentional physical contact or bodily harm on another person, even in situations where the intention was not to cause any bodily harm (McNally & Cook, 2015 – Research Paper Writing Help Service). False imprisonment takes place when an individual who lacks legal justification or authority intentionally restrains the ability of another person to move freely (McNally & Cook, 2015 – Research Paper Writing Help Service). When a dog bite occurs, the owner can be held accountable under the common law negligence theory, especially in situations where the owner fails to take action to prevent the dog from committing the attack. In this case, Thomas should be held liable for assaulting Gabriel because he intentionally punched him in the jaw, causing Gabriel to lose two teeth. The fact that Thomas action caused bodily harm on Gabriel proves that an assault occurred.
Moreover, Thomas dragged a bloodied Gabriel into his home and locked him from outside to prevent him from leaving. Thomas actions amounted to False imprisonment because he had no legal justification or authority to restrain Gabriel’s ability to move freely intentionally. Finally, Thomas should also qualify to be charged for negligence because his dog bites Gabriel in his presence without taking any action to prevent it. As such, based on these factors, Thomas should be held liable for assault, negligence because of the dog bite and false imprisonment on Gabriel.
The Potential Legal Problems for Maggie Who Owns a Small Burmese Restaurant
This case aims to answer a legal question. First, is Maggie liable for tax evasion for her Small Burmese Restaurant? Secondly, should the manager at the restaurant be charged for sexual harassment on junior employees? Tax evasion occurs when an individual or enterprise deliberately misrepresents the actual state of its affairs to the relevant tax authorities intending to reduce its tax liability (Baker, 2013). Tax evasion could include activities that involve dishonest tax reporting like declaring fewer profits or income than the actual amounts earned, or in other cases overstating deductions (Baker, 2013).
Regarding sexual harassment, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 defines it as unwelcome sexual advances or requests of sexual favors through verbal or physical conduct, and this behavior implicitly or explicitly affects an employee’s level of performance or generates an offensive or hostile work environment (Levy, 2009). In this case, Maggie has never filed any statement of information, or created an LLC bank account but uses her joint-checking account for paying any of her business expenses. Maggie actions would easily lead to misrepresentation of the actual state of its affairs at the restaurant to the relevant tax authorities. In regards to the sexual harassment case, a manager at the restaurant has been making sexual advances to junior employees by offering to take them out against their will and threatening to fire them for declining his offer. These unwelcome sexual advances have affected this employee’s level of performance and created a hostile working environment. As such, based on these factors, both Maggie and the manager at the restaurant are liable for Tax evasion and sexual harassment, respectively.
The Potential Legal Problems for Susan
The legal issues at hand are whether Susan should sue Michael for the sale of a faulty car that led to an accident. Secondly, should Susan’s husband Ken, sue the Black & Decker for a sale of an unsafe product that severed his wrist on the left hand? Product liability laws are established on the premise that individuals or companies have a duty of ensuring that their consumers are protected from any potential hazards when using their products (FINDLAW, 2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers). The courts have also interpreted that a manufacturer should have more knowledge or insights regarding their products and it’s up to them to assume any financial responsibility resulting from any form of injury or damage on the consumer (FINDLAW, 2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers). As such, a consumer has the right to make personal injury claims if they sustain any injury from defective products. In this case, Susan cannot sue Michael for the sale of a faulty car because at first, she took the keys of the car from Michael’s place without his consent. Secondly, she was over speeding when the brakes of the car failed. As such, Michael cannot be held liable for the sale of a faulty product. However, Susan’s husband has the right to sue the Black & Decker for a sale of an unsafe product that severed his wrist because the fault was an error resulting from the design of the product. As such, Black & Decker should be held liable for the injuries sustained.
The Potential Legal Problems for Sophie
In this case, the issue at hand is to establish if there is any legal contract between Sophie and Ben for the two services provided? The elements that determine whether a given contract exists must include; an offer where one party makes a promise to complete or refrain from doing a specified action, a consideration where something valuable is offered or promised as an exchange for the specified non-action or action (Jackson, 2018: 2024 – Write My Essay For Me | Essay Writing Service For Your Papers Online). It distinguishes a gift from a contract. Finally, there must be an acceptance and agreement from both parties regarding the offer at hand (Jackson, 2018: 2024 – Write My Essay For Me | Essay Writing Service For Your Papers Online). In both of these cases, Sophie and Ben entered into a verbal contract by meeting all the elements necessary for the existence of a contract. As such, Sophie should know that her agreements with Ben are legitimate.
The Potential Legal Problems for Dave
Should Dave file for a defective product claim against lance for the sale of the spoilt car? Product liability laws are established on the premise that individuals or companies have a duty of ensuring that their consumers are protected from any potential hazards when using their products (FINDLAW, 2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers). The courts have also interpreted that a manufacturer should have more knowledge or insights regarding their products and it’s up to them to assume any financial responsibility resulting from any form of injury or damage on the consumer (FINDLAW, 2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers). In this case, Lance assured Dave everything worked on the vehicle and that because it was old, it had character. However, Lance knew that his description was false and it was only meant to convince Dave to buy the car despite knowing that it was defective. As such, Dave has a right to sue lance for this defective product.

References
Baker, P. (2013). Improper use of tax treaties, tax avoidance and tax evasion. doi:10.18356/fd355079-en
FINDLAW. (2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers). Dangerous consumer products – FindLaw. Retrieved from https://injury.findlaw.com/product-liability/dangerous-consumer-products.html
Jackson, N. (2018: 2024 – Write My Essay For Me | Essay Writing Service For Your Papers Online). Essential cases: Contract law. Law Trove. doi:10.1093/he/9780191866135.001.0001
Kyriakakis, J. (2019: 2024 – Online Assignment Homework Writing Help Service By Expert Research Writers). Trespass to land and trespass to personal property. Contemporary Australian Tort Law, 266-315. doi:10.1017/9781108626224.007
Levy, M. L. (2009). Civil Rights Act of 1964. African American Studies Center. doi:10.1093/acref/9780195301731.013.45393
McNally, D., & Cook, P. J. (2015 – Research Paper Writing Help Service). Comparing sexual Assult survey prevalence rates at military service academies and U.S. colleges. doi:10.21236/ada625287
Morgan, G., & Rushton, P. (2015 – Research Paper Writing Help Service). Arson, treason and plot: Britain, America and the law, 1770-1777. History, 100(341), 374-391. doi:10.1111/1468-229x.12111

Order | Check Discount