Cornell Code Corporation, Stanford Engineering, EZ Delivery Company - Essay Example

1. Because it is not specified what type of advertising Stanford chose, it is difficult to guess the form of advertising that was used. If Stanford’s advertising only consisted of some form of multimedia, then slander would apply. If, however, Stanford used a written form to advertise then Cornell could sue for libel.

In order to prove their case, Cornell would have to have proof that Stanford’s claims are false. The most obvious form of proof is that Cornell actually tests its software and does not have its customers do so. Also, a third party would usually have to testify that they heard or saw the false advertising. Since this advertising was meant for the public, anyone could act as a witness. Finally, Cornell would also have to prove that Stanford's false actions have directly led to Cornell losing sales to Stanford. This last part would be difficult to prove, as there may be other factors for Cornell losing sales to Stanford, but if found guilty then Stanford would likely have to pay damages to Cornell.

In order for Flo to recover damages from Dan, he must show that it was Dan’s responsibility to look after his truck. Then Flo must prove that Dan failed to uphold his duty by not setting the parking brake when making a delivery. Next, Flo must show that by Dan not setting the parking brake, his truck caused a chain of events that eventually ended in Flo receiving injuries from the falling crane. If Flo can prove that he did not get injured through any actions of his own, then the only other alternative is the falling truck, which fell due to a burned wall, which caught on fire due to the gas station pump, which only burst due to the truck crashing into it.

The onus is on Flo to prove that each of these small events was influenced by the other and that Dan is ultimately responsible for every incident that occurred as a result of him not setting the parking brake on his truck. Whether Dan intended to leave the parking brake off is not in question, only if his actions caused Flo’s injuries. Because Dan was a representative of EZ Delivery Company, Flo can ultimately hold the company responsible for any actions that Dan took. The case rests on whether Flo can prove that negligence on the part of Dan, whether intentional or not, resulted in Flo suffering injuries. EZ Delivery Company would then likely consult with Flo’s lawyers and try to come to a settlement agreement that both parties agree to. Read More