Small Business and Acceptance

Email Policy Restrictions Respond to the following prompts: Identify the employer's policy at issue. A policy that prohibited the use of corporate email for personal/non-business purposes (Law Memo, 2017) Determine why the policy was challenged. The policy was enforced for union email activities but not for other non-business emails (e.g. baby announcements, etc.) (Law Memo, 2017). Compare and contrast the General Counsel's and the employer-Respondent's arguments The plaintiff asserted that the enforcement of the policy was retaliation for union-organizing activities.

The defense asserted that the enforcement was consistent with the policy. The judge actually agreed with the latter but came down against the employer because they were not consistent in enforcing the policy for EVERYONE that deviated from the policy, for whatever reason (Law Memo, 2017). D. Analyze the implications of the decision. Such policies are acceptable but must be enforced across the board, not selectively (on purpose or on accident). Either NO non-business emails are acceptable or they ALL are. It cannot be in between.

The employer cannot selectively choose when the policy is to be enforced and/or punished for (Law Memo, 2017). Contract Acceptance Cane, the sole owner of a small business, has a large piece of used farm equipment for sale. He offers to sell the equipment to Bill for $10,000. • Discuss the legal effects of any two (2) of the following events on the offer: Use the Internet to research the law in your home state (Virginia) on the purchase of personal property.

Discuss the law in your home state, and compare and contrast it with the Statute of Frauds. 1. Cane dies prior to Bill's acceptance, and at the time he accepts, Bill is unaware of Cane's death. • If indeed the contract is accepted and Cane was not aware of the death first, the sale would typically be binding.

The caveat, of course, is whether or not Bill could prove that the offer was made, that he accepted it and/or that he did so WITHOUT knowing that Cane was dead before acceptance. Indeed, so long as Bill could prove the first two and the estate of Cane, if they felt inclined, tried to disprove the latter, the sale would be upheld, up to and including with the estate and other proceedings after Cane's death.

Bill would just have to file against the estate, of course offering proof of the correspondence including a timeline of when the offer was extended, when it was accepted and, if possible, when Bill found out Cane had passed. There are only six things that could terminate the offer extended by Cane.

.an expiration or lapse of the offer (no deadline was ostensibly set), Bill rejecting the offer (did not happen), a counteroffer (did not happen), a qualified/conditional acceptance (did not happen), a valid revocation by the offer extender (did not happen. the death of Cane is not an example of this) or by operation of the law. A "firm offer" was made and it was accepted before the offeree knew of the death of the person who made the offer (NP, 2017).

There is no firm evidence that the state of Virginia specifically would see otherwise, except with one exception. For the sale of goods of more than $500 (which is the case here), the offer AND the acceptance would have to be in writing. As long as that is in order, the sale would be enforceable. If it is not in writing, it would probably not be enforceable. With that said, the "contract" may be as simple as an exchange of text message or emails. It need not be an official "contract".

Even so, it must not be strictly verbal, which is consistent with the statute of frauds (Fullerton Knowles, 2017). 2. The night before Bill accepts, a fire destroys the equipment • As noted above, there are some exceptions that do lead to the voiding of a contract. The three major ones that should be discussed would be if the deal is fraudulent or illegal on its face.