SondraStark_Unit8CaseStudy_MT311-07.docx - Allen is in this...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
UNIT 8 CASE Sondra Stark Unit 8 Case Study Business Law MT311-07 Kaplan University May 13, 2010
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
UNIT 8 CASE I feel that an officer or director can be held personally responsible as well as the company. In this case, Allen did the work, and he happened to be an officer. He is responsible as a person, and as a company. Since the tort falls under negligence, both the defendant and the company may be sued, under respondet superior. Based on these facts that we have, the corporation entity is not protected. Just as I could be a stakeholder in the corporation, I could be an owner. A stakeholder may sue a corporation, and a corporation may sue a stakeholder.
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Allen is in this exact same position. He personally was negligent for the work; therefore with it being his company, he is also liable. This way the Estelles’ will be able to recover their award. If they were to sue only the person, the likelihood they would actually receive their award is probably minimal. By suing the corporation, as they can under the doctrine of respondeat superior, the corporation can better handle that type of loss and be able to give the Estelles’ the award they are due. REFERENCES UNIT 8 CASE Miller, R., & Jentz G. (2009) Fundamentals of Business Law Part I Pgs 520-529....
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 05/06/2011.

Page1 / 3

SondraStark_Unit8CaseStudy_MT311-07.docx - Allen is in this...

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