Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Cases
A.P. SMITH MFG. CO. V. BARLOW - (1953)............................................................................ 1
Auerbach v. Bennett...................................................................................................... 65
BARNES V. ANDREWS...................................................................................................... 51
BOHATCH V. BUTLER & BINION......................................................................................... 24
CREEL V. LILLY............................................................................................................. 20
EISENBERG V. FLYING TIGER LINE, INC.............................................................................. 62
HMG/COURTLAND PROPERTIES, INC. V. GRAY......................................................................56
IN RE CAREMARK INTL, INC............................................................................................ 51
IN RE ESTATE OF FENIMORE............................................................................................ 12
In re Slicone Gel Breast Implants.................................................................................... 44
In re Suhadolnik........................................................................................................... 34
In re The Walt Disney Company Derivative Litigation..............................................................59
In Re USA Cafes.......................................................................................................... 30
JONES CO., INC. V. FRANK BURKE, JR.................................................................................53
JOY V. NORTH............................................................................................................... 50
KAHN V. ICAHN............................................................................................................. 30
KORTUM V. WEBASTO SUNROOFS, INC................................................................................. 48
KOVACIK V. REED.......................................................................................................... 23
LIEBERMAN V. WYOMING.COM, LLC...................................................................................36
MARX V. AKERS............................................................................................................. 64
MCCALL V. SCOTT......................................................................................................... 52
MCQUADE V. STONEHAM................................................................................................. 45
MEINHARD V. SALMON.................................................................................................... 14
MILLER V. MCDONALDS CORPORATION..............................................................................10
NORTHEAST HARBOR GOLD CLUB, INC. V. HARRIS.................................................................53
ii
PAGE V. PAGE............................................................................................................... 25
SHLENSKY V. WRIGLEY.................................................................................................... 49
SMITH V. VAN GORKOM................................................................................................... 50
VILLAR V. KERNAN ......................................................................................................... 46
Webber vs. U.S. Sterling Securities.................................................................................... 33
ZAPATA CORPORATION V. MALDONADO................................................................................66
ZEIGER V. WILF............................................................................................................ 29
iii
Business Associations
4) Views of Other Gonster Machers
A) Friedman's View
I) In a free-enterprise, private-property system, a corporate executive is an employee of
the owners of the business.
(1) His responsibility is to conduct business in accordance with the owners' desires.
(A) Thus, the executive is the agent of the individuals who own the corporation.
(I) He is, however, a person in his own right and has duties or other social
responsibilities that he assumes on his own.
1. In this capacity, he is acting as a principal, not an agent.
A. He is spending his own money or time or energy, not the money of
his employers or the time or energy he has contracted to devote to
their purposes.
(II) Only one social responsibility of a business
1. To use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its
profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game.
A. Friedman says that any action taken should benefit the company in
some manner. There must be a nexus between the action and the
benefit.
II) Agency: The fiduciary relation which results from the manifestation of consent by
one person to another that the other shall act on his behalf and subject to his control,
and consent by the other so to act. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF AGENCY 1
III) Principal: The one for whom action is to be taken. Id.
IV) Agent: The one who is to act. Id.
V) Mutual ~Consent
(1) RSA(3rd): Manifestation of consent by both parties
(2) RSA(2nd): Manifestation by principal; consent by agent
Vote
o
Business entities are required to keep appropriate accounting records, and to make
these records available to the owners. MBCA 16.01(b) and 16.02(b)(2).
I) Businesses typically maintain several financial statements, which are provided to
investors, the companys managers, and to the public and public enforcement
authorities.
(1) Without these accurate reports, the company can go under without the
managers or public knowing before it is too late.
Dodge v. ford
Primary motive must be profits
Doing good on the side is okay
II)
Operating income can be a useful concept because it separates operations from financing
A company can often change its capital structure (financing) more easily than it can
change its operations
(2) Cash Flow Statement: Measures the cash made available to a business from its
operations during a given period.
(A) It is a measure of how much more cash a business has at the end of the
year than it had at the beginning of that year.
(I) Generally, an income statement is converted into a cash flow statement by
the following formula
1. To get cash flows, start with net income
2.
3.
4.
Add change in net liabilities and funds from new issues of stock
(raising equity capital)
Assets, like cash are NOT depreciated b/c they dont get
used up.
III. Accounts Receivable are not depreciated but may be
written off.
2. Liabilities
A. What the company owes.
I. Ex: Accounts payable, Short term debts, Long term debts, Taxes,
Accrued payroll and other liabilities
3. Owners Equity
A. What is left over after a business subtracts the liabilities from the
assets.
(V) If the assets are all of the companys things that have value, and the
liabilities are all the claims on that value, then the difference
between the two is the value of the business to the owners The
owners equity.
NOTES
-
Matching: Costs or expenses should be booked in the same period as the revenues
those expenditures helped generate.
Conservatism: Data should be conservative they should present the firms financial
data in an accurate way, but err on the side of understating its revenues and the value of
its assets, and on overestimating its costs and liabilities.
(B) Time Value of Money: The principle that money currently possessed will
not be worth as much in the future.
(I) 100K now, will not be worth 100K later.
6) Present Value = Future Value/(1 + Discount Rate)^ year
7) Net Present Value = Present cash flow + Discounted future cash flows
5
o growth rate
o Owner personally liable for actions of agents
Note agents not limited to employees
o Potential liability and likelihood of incident may grow as business grows
c) Corporation
i) Most common legal structure for large businesses.
(1) Corporations owners are generally protected from personal liability.
(a) In exchange for this protection, the corporation must also pay tax on its
income just like a real person.
(i) Corporation pays a tax, then the owners of the corporation pay a tax on the
part of its earnings that are distributed to them as dividends.
(b) This double taxation creates powerful incentives for those enterprises that
anticipate distributing earnings to use a tax-advantaged, pass-through form,
such as a partnership or a limited liability company.
(2) Maximum tax rate on corporate income is 35%.
d) Partnership
i) Business entities that consist of 2 or more owners.
ii) Treated like a proprietorship for tax and liability purposes.
iii) Taxes are paid only at the personal level on the partners share of the income
(1) This is called pass through taxation.
iv) Each partner is jointly and severally liable.
e) Limited Partnership
i) Like a partnership or proprietorship for tax purposes.
ii) Somewhat like a corporation for tax purposes.
(1) A partnership that has both limited and general partners.
(a) General: Assumes management responsibility and unlimited liability for
business.
(b) Limited: Similar to a shareholder.
f) Limited Liability Company (LLC)
i) A business structure to provide both the protection from liability of a corporation and
the protection from double taxation of a partnership.
(1) Owners are not individually liable for the companys debts.
ii) The LLC is not a tax paying entity.
(1) Income taxes are only paid once by the owners of the LLC when a part of the
companys earnings is distributed to them.
g) How do you Choose?
i) Who will the owners be?
(1) If the investors and owners will be a small group of individuals, a partnership of
some form is clearly a possibility, as is an LLC.
(a) If the business will require Venture Capitalists, then they typically wont
invest in LLCs, but only corporations b/c they dont want to be held
7
personally liable.
ii) What are the Capital Requirements and cash flow characteristics of the business
likely to be?
get the assigned job done, even if P did not spell it out in detail.
(iii)
Apparent Authority: Created by manifestations by Principal to a
3rd party.
1. Manifestations must be attributable to the Principle. 8 & 27.
2. Must get to the 3rd party
3. Must lead the 3rd party reasonably to conclude that the agent is an
agent for principal.
ANALYSIS: 1) is there an agency relationship, 2) Is there express or apparent authority to
act (cite the elements of express and apparent - 26, 27. Finally, apply 140 to determine
if the principal will be liable to the 3rd party for the agents actions.
(iv)Respondeat Superior: A principal may be liable even though he is not
personally negligent.
1. Does not apply in all cases of agency.
a. Applies only to a subset of principal and agent relationships
called master/servant. RSA 220.
i. Master has the right to control the details of how the servant
does the job.
ii. Master has control over the day to day performance of the
agents task.
iii. Master is liable for the torts of a servant only if the tort was
committed within the scope of employment. RSA 219
b. Servant must be distinguished from an independent contractor,
who is hired to do a job, but is not told specifically how to do it.
i. Servant: 2 states that a servant is employed by a master to
perform a service in his affairs whose physical conduct in the
performance of the service is controlled or is subject to the
right of control.
ii. Torts of ICs are generally NOT attributable to the person
who hires him.
iii. Vicarious tort liability comes from the fact that the person
engaging someone controls the details of how the job is to
be done.
Principal liable if
embedded into the sandwich. The trial court granted summary judgment to McDonalds on the
ground that it did not own or operate the restaurant, but was a mere franchisor and 3K was the
proper party to sue.
3K owned the restaurant under a license agreement with McDonalds that required it to operate
in a manner consistent with the McDonalds System. This agreement specified numerous
different things that had to be strictly complied with.
Despite the numerous specifications that 3K was bound to uphold, there was a provision that
stated that 3K was not an agent of McDonalds, but an IC, and any claims by a 3rd party would be
solely against 3K.
Issue
Whether there is evidence that would permit a jury to find McDonalds vicariously liable for
those injuries because of its relationship with 3K.
Holding
Reversed. There is sufficient evidence to raise a jury issue under both actual agency and
apparent agency principles.
-
Miller went to the restaurant under the assumption that McDonalds owned, controlled,
and managed it.
o Therefore, Miller was justifiably relying on McDonalds.
If the franchise agreement goes beyond the stage of setting standards,
and allocates to the franchisor the right to exercise control over the
daily operations of the franchise, an actual agency relationship exists.
The court believes that a jury could find that McDonalds retained
sufficient control over 3Ks daily operations that an actual agency
relationship existed.
McDonalds required precise methods that 3K must fulfill
McDonalds regularly sent inspectors
McDonalds uniforms, menus, recipes, etc. were to be used.
10
12