Clark_11e-AM-Ch14.doc - C HAPTER 1 4 M ISTAKES FRAUD A ND V...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
109 C HAPTER 14 M ISTAKES , F RAUD , AND V OLUNTARY C ONSENT A NSWERS TO C RITICAL A NALYSIS Q UESTIONS IN THE F EATURE INSIGHT INTO ETHICS—CRITICAL THINKING—INSIGHT INTO TECHNOLOGY (PAGE 293) As long as each click on an ad link on the Web triggers a commission that has to be paid, we will be facing a financial formula that gives rise to unethical behavior.” Do you think that technology will some day be able to distinguish between bone fide clicks by truly interested parties and bogus clicks? Why or why not? No, because whether a click is “bona fide” depends on the clicker’s subjective intent. Technology may some day be able to distinguish more accurately between clicks, however, by requiring more clicks to validate the initial contact or by tracing a clicker’s subsequent moves. Or an entirely different method for the determination and payment of commissions might be devised. A NSWERS TO Q UESTIONS AT THE E NDS OF THE C ASES CASE 14.1—QUESTIONS (PAGE 289) 1A. Why did the court in this case consider Dr. Markworth’s misdiagnosis a bilateral mistake rather than a unilateral mistake? Dr. Markworth’s misdiagno- sis was the basis on which both parties agreed to a settlement, according to the court. Roberts testified that he would not have agreed to this settlement had he known that his injury was not at maximum medical improvement. In that circumstance, Century would also have negotiated a different agreement. 2A. Why are situations such as the one presented in this case often sources of litigation appealed to the states’ highest courts? The amount of money involved in these cases makes them important to the parties involved and to their attorneys. Partly for this reason, there can be many cases involving similar facts for which a par- ticular decision serves as a binding precedent.
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
110 UNIT THREE: CONTRACTS AND E-CONTRACTS CASE 14.2—(PAGE 291) THE ETHICAL DIMENSION If one of Vokes’s fellow students, rather than her instructor, had praised her ability and encouraged her to buy more lessons, should the result in this case have been different? Explain. The result likely should have been different. In its opinion, the court explained that a “statement of a party having . .. superior knowledge may be regarded as a statement of fact although it would be considered as opinion if the parties were dealing on equal terms.” In the Vokes case, the instructor and the school clearly appeared to be taking advantage of Vokes. This is not only illegal but unethical. Most likely, a student, rather than an instructor, who praised Vokes’s ability and prompted her to buy more lessons, would have been a party “dealing on equal terms” and the praise might not have been perceived as illegal or unethical. CASE 14.3—(PAGE 298)
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-Ch14.doc - C HAPTER 1 4 M ISTAKES FRAUD A ND V...

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