Clark_11e-AM-Ch13.doc

Clark_11e-AM-Ch13.doc - C HAPTER 1 3 C APACITY AND L...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
101 C HAPTER 13 C APACITY AND L EGALITY A NSWER TO C RITICAL A NALYSIS Q UESTION IN THE F EATURE CONTEMPORARY LEGAL DEBATES—WHERE DO YOU STAND? (PAGE 275) Determining what is and what is not gambling does not always lend itself to an easy answer. If you buy a mutual fund that consists of a broad array of stocks and your purpose is to enhance your standard of living during your re- tirement, no one considers that gambling. In contrast, if you are a day trader—buying and selling stocks during a one-day period—you are clearly “betting” that the stocks you buy in the morning and then sell in the evening will have gone up in value. Should day trading be deemed gambling and therefore illegal? Where do you draw the line between what is and what is not gambling in our society? According to the text, gambling is any scheme that involves a distribution of property by chance among persons who have paid a valuable considera- tion for the opportunity (chance) to receive the property. Gambling is the creation of risk for the purpose of assuming it. Stock trading does not fit this definition—it is not a dis- tribution of property by chance, at least not in theory, nor is it the creation of risk for the purpose of assuming it. It should be deemed illegal due to its possible negative effect on investors’ funds and its potential addictive nature. It should not be deemed illegal due to that course’s possible inhibiting effect on investment. The line between what is and what is not legal gambling in our society should likely be drawn where the ill effects (addiction, crime, etc.) outweigh the benefits (state revenues, entertainment, etc.). A NSWERS TO Q UESTIONS AT THE E NDS OF THE C ASES CASE 13.1—QUESTIONS (PAGE 268) 1A. What might have happened in future cases if the court had held that there was no implied-in-law contract between Fountain and Yale Diagnostic Radiology? The court stated that “[t]he present case illustrates the inequity that would arise if no implied in law contract arose between Fountain and the plaintiff. Fountain was shot in the head at close range and required emergency medical care. Under such circumstances, a medical services provider cannot stop to consider how the bills will be paid or by whom.” This indicates that had the court held otherwise, a medical service
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
102 UNIT THREE: CONTRACTS AND E-CONTRACTS provider in a future case might have waited to render aid until it could be determined who would pay the bill, which of course might be a fatal delay. 2A. How does the result in this case encourage payment on contracts for ne- cessaries? The court found “the purposes behind the . .. rule that parents are primar- ily liable and . .., pursuant to the doctrine of necessaries, that a minor is secondarily liable, . .. serve to encourage payment on contracts for necessaries. Those purposes are (1) to reinforce parents’ obligation to support their children, and (2) to provide a mecha- nism for collection by creditors when, nonetheless, the parents either refuse or are un-
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 10/11/2010 for the course MGT 301 taught by Professor Pederson during the Fall '10 term at SUNY Stony Brook.

Page1 / 8

Clark_11e-AM-Ch13.doc - C HAPTER 1 3 C APACITY AND L...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

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