Case Briefs.Week 10

Case Briefs.Week 10 - Kelly Bowers 103679426 Case Briefs...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Kelly Bowers 103679426 Case Briefs Week 10 F ACTS : Brain Gauthier was a truck driver for Angelo Todesca Corporation (∆). The ∆ safety manual required that all trucks have an alarm that go off automatically when the truck backs up. The one on Gauthier’s truck was missing. While the order for a replacement was being shipped, Gauthier backed up into a police offer and killed him. Both Gauthier and ∆ were charged with motor vehicle homicide. ∆ was convicted and fined $2,500. An appellate court reversed ∆’s conviction. The stat appealed. I SSUE : Is ∆ vicariously liable and therefore able to be held accountable for criminal acts of its agents despite not directly operating the truck? R ULE OF L AW : Common law (regarding corporate liability for torts and crimes), Massachusetts State Statute of corporate negligence A NALYSIS : ∆ argues that it can’t be liable for a motor vehicle homicide because no corporation can directly drive a motor vehicle. The commonwealth argues that corporate liability is necessarily vicarious. The court agreed. By ∆’s logic, no corporation could ever be liable for anything because it can only act through agents. So long as that agent is acting within the scope of their employment on behalf of the corporation, that corporation is at least in part responsible for the negligence. ∆ further argues that there was no criminal intent on their part – no Massachusetts law requires the alarm. However, Massachusetts law criminalizes negligence with a specific content (in this case, driving on a public road or highway) and a specific outcome (in this case, the death of the police officer). There is no statute-violation requisite for criminal liability. C ONCLUSION : The state supreme court affirmed ∆’s conviction. F ACTS : The Kearns-McCarthy family were the principal shareholders of Kearns-Tribune Corporation which owned The Salt Lake Tribune . The shareholders decided to sell the Corporation to Tele-Communications, Inc. while receiving an option to repurchase the assets of The Tribune at a later date. The family formed Salt Lake Tribune Publishing Co. (∏) to own the option. Two years later, TCI merged with AT&T Corp (∆) which gave ∆ control over Kearns- Tribune Corporation (which became an LLC, KTLLC). ∏ filed a complaint to enforce the option. ∏ moved for a preliminary injunction which the district court denied. ∏ appealed. I SSUE : R ULE OF L AW : Common law of corporate stock transfer, Utah Code Section 16-10a-627 A NALYSIS : In 1952, Deseret News and the predecessor in interest of KTLLC entered into the Joint Operating Agreement (JOA) to share overhead expenses related to the production of The Salt Lake Tribune and the Deseret News . The JOA created the Newspaper Agency Corporation (NAC) of which KTLLC and Deseret own 50% each. The JOA prohibits transfer by KTLLC or
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 12/08/2011 for the course MGMT 1A taught by Professor Litt during the Spring '08 term at UCLA.

Page1 / 3

Case Briefs.Week 10 - Kelly Bowers 103679426 Case Briefs...

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