Case Study: Hal Coker And Mcwilliams

874 Words4 Pages
• Describe the steps in the administrative process from the agency’s and the citizen’s perspective when a government agency proposes a rule or regulation. What would you recommend Roc do in response to the FDA's proposed rule? Before an agency can begin rulemaking proceedings, it must be given jurisdiction by congressional enactment in the form of a statute. In other words a proposed
rule begins with
a
summary
of
the
issues
and
it
also
states
why
the
rule
is
necessary. Afterwards the agency has to determine the cost and benefit of the problems, issues, and solutions. Once the agency proposes its regulation, it must be published in the Federal Register (Twomey, 97). Following the publication of the proposed rules, the public has the opportunity…show more content…
Determine which party will win and provide support for your decision. Hal Coker does have a right to sue McWilliams for misinforming its customers. However, I don’t believe McWilliams misinformed its customers. “Food-labeling regulations are an example of laws grounded in the value of protecting the safety and health of individuals” (Twomey,) with that being said Hal Coker should have carefully read the nutrition facts before ordering the food to determine if it was healthy for him or not. Since Hal Coker is filing a negligence claim, McWilliams may assert a contributory negligence claim against Hal, effectively stating that the health condition occurred partially as a result of the Hal’s own actions. So since Hal negligently failed to inform himself about the nutrition contained in the food, McWilliams will win in this case. • Are the MW logo and mascot, McBurger, considered intellectual property? If yes, what type? If not, why not? Are there any issues with protecting the logo or mascot in the U.S. and in foreign countries? Does McWilliams have a case against McDonalds over the use of the golden…show more content…
They both signed and agreed for the property to be sold at $400,000. As for Turner not remembering signing the contract, “a person with a mental disorder may be so disabled as to lack capacity to make a contract. An individual seeking to avoid the consequences of a contract due to incompetency must demonstrate that at the time the agreement was executed he or she was suffering from a mental illness” (Twomey, 287), Turner showed no signs of having a mental disorder when discussing and signing the contract. So there were brochures on the table about Alzheimer and assistant living, there is no evidence to prove that those were his at the present moment. Scott and Turner agreed and signed the contract making it
Open Document