BUSLAWassnISCcaseSTUDY

BUSLAWassnISCcaseSTUDY - Issue Is it within Washington's...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Issue Is it within Washington’s jurisdiction to require International Shoe Company, a foreign-based corporation, to pay unemployment compensation statutory of employees in Washington? Rule A company is within the jurisdiction of a state if it does business within its borders. International Harvester Co. v. Kentucky sets precedent; a corporation is not made immune from ordinary process of the courts of that state just because the corporation is only conducting interstate commerce. The fact that there was a continuous flow of product into the state due to the company’s presence establishes the fact that business is being conducted. Hired employees did represent the corporation and its interests. Furthermore, a company that does business in that state is protected by those laws, and is given rights under that state. Employees solicit sales and accept money for those transactions on the behalf of the corporation that they work for. If business transactions are taking place with the consent and instruction of a company, then that
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 07/06/2009 for the course MGMT 303 taught by Professor Scott during the Spring '08 term at Agnes Scott College.

Page1 / 4

BUSLAWassnISCcaseSTUDY - Issue Is it within Washington's...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online