Intestacy Laws. Three and a half years after Lauren and Warren Woodward were married, they were informed that Warren had leukemia. At the time, the couple had no children, and physicians told the Woodwards that the leukemia treatment might leave Warren sterile. The couple arranged for Warren's sperm to be collected and placed in a sperm bank for later use. Two years after Warren died, Lauren gave birth to twin girls who had been conceived through artificial insemination using his sperm. The following year, Lauren applied for Social Security survivor benefits for the two children. Her application was rejected on the ground that she had not established that the twins were the husband's children within the meaning of the Social Security Act. Woodward then filed a paternity action in Massachusetts, and the probate court determined that Warren Woodward was the twins' father. She then filed an action in court to determine the inheritance rights of the twins. (See Intestacy Laws.)

(a) The first group will outline how a court should decide the inheritance rights of children conceived from the sperm of a deceased individual and his surviving spouse.

(b) The second group will decide if children conceived after a parent's death (by means of artificial insemination or in vitro fertilization) still inherit under intestate succession laws, and will explain why or why not.

(c) The third group will consider the inheritance rights of a child who was conceived by means of artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, or a surrogate. Should they be different from the rights of a child conceived in the traditional manner? Assuming the biological parent is not part of the child's life, should the child still be able to inherit from the biological parent? Why or why not?

Napster, Inc., offered a service that allowed its users to browse digital music files on other users' computers and download selections for free. Music industry principals sued Napster for copyright infringement, and the court ordered Napster to remove files that were identified as infringing from its service. When Napster failed to comply, it was shut down.

A few months later, Bertelsmann, a German corporation, loaned Napster $85 million to fund its anticipated transition to a licensed digital music distribution system. The terms allowed Napster to spend the loan on "general, administrative and overhead expenses." In an e-mail, Napster's chief executive officer referred to a "side deal" under which Napster could use up to$10 million of the loan to pay litigation expenses. Napster failed to launch the new system before declaring bankruptcy. A group of song writers and music publishers filed a suit against Bertelsmann, alleging that its loan had prolonged Napster's infringement. The plaintiffs asked the court to order the disclosure of all of Bertelsmann's attorney-client communications related to the loan. (See Confidentiality and Privilege.)

(a) The first group will identify the principle that Bertelsmann could assert to protect these communications and outline the purpose of this protection.

(b) The second group will decide whether this principle should protect a client who consults an attorney for advice that will help the client commit fraud.

(c) A third group will determine whether the court should grant the plaintiffs' request.

John Warren wanted to buy a condominium in California. Hildegard Merrill was the agent for the seller. Because Warren's credit rating was poor, Merrill told him he needed a co-borrower to obtain a mortgage at a reasonable rate. Merrill said that her daughter Charmaine would "go on title" until the loan and sale were complete if Warren would pay her $10,000. Merrill also offered to defer her commission on the sale as a loan to Warren so that he could make a$20$ percent down payment on the property. He agreed to both plans. Merrill secured the mortgage in Charmaine's name alone by misrepresenting her daughter's address, business, and income. To close the sale, Merrill had Warren remove his name from the title to the property. In October, Warren moved into the condominium, repaid Merrill the amount of her deferred commission, and began paying the mortgage. Within a few months, Merrill had Warren evicted. Warren subsequently filed a suit against Merrill and Charmaine. (See Duties of Agents and Principals.)

(a) The first group will determine who among these parties was in an agency relationship.

(b) The second group will discuss the basic duty that an agent owes a principal and decide whether that duty was breached here.

(c) The third group will explain whether Warren is entitled to any remedies in this situation.

Agents' Signatures. Robert Helmer and Percy Helmer, Jr., were authorized signatories on the corporate checking account of Event Marketing, Inc. The Helmers signed a check drawn on Event Marketing's account and issued to Rummel Technologies, Inc. (RTI), in the amount of $\$ 84,965$. The check was signed on July $13, 2022$, but dated August $14$ . When RTI presented the check for payment, it was dishonored due to insufficient funds. RTI filed a suit in a Georgia state court against the Helmers to collect the amount of the check. (See Signature Liability.)

(a) The first group will determine whether an authorized signatory on a corporate account can be held personally liable for corporate checks returned for insufficient funds.

(b) The second group will decide if the Helmers were personally liable on Event Marketing's check in this situation.

Since the 1970s, what changes have taken place to the role of committee chairpersons?

In what circumstance might the Port Authority-or anyone else-take a migratory bird without a permit and not be sanctioned?

Draw a political cartoon that could have appeared in a colonial newspaper.

In Richland, Washington, Robert Ingersoll planned his wedding to include about a hundred guests, a photographer, a caterer, a wedding cake, and flowers. Ingersoll had been a customer of Arlene's Flowers and Gifts for more than nine years and had spent several thousand dollars at the shop. When he approached Arlene's owner, Baronelle Stutzman, to buy flowers for his wedding, she refused because Ingersoll and his fiancé, Curt Freed, were a same-sex couple. Deeply offended, Ingersoll and Freed dropped their wedding plans and married in a modest ceremony.

(a) Federal and state laws attempt to protect consumers from unfair trade practices, including discriminatory requirements, related to consumer transactions. Using the Review step of the IDDR approach, consider whether it would be ethically fair to hold Stutzman personally liable for a violation of these laws.

(b) Using the Discussion step of the IDDR approach, consider actions that Ingersoll and Freed as consumers might take in response to Arlene's-Stutzman's-discriminatory rejection of their offer to do business.

How is Congress structured and organized?

How did the rules of contract construction apply in this case?

On learning that Sébastien planned to travel abroad, Roslyn asked him to deliver $25,000 in cash to her family in Mexico. During a customs inspection at the border, Sébastien told the customs inspector that he carried less than$10,000. The officer discovered the actual amount of cash that Sébastien was carrying, seized it, and arrested Sebastien. Roslyn asked the government to return what she claimed were her funds, arguing that the arrangement with Sébastien was a bailment and that she still held title to the cash. (See Bailments.)

(a) The first group will argue that Roslyn is entitled to the cash.

(b) The second group will take the position of the government and develop an argument that Roslyn's agreement with Sébastien does not qualify as a bailment.

(c) The third group will assume that a bailment was created, identify what type of bailment it was, and explain the degree of care required of the bailee.

Under the plaintiff's suggested reading of the regulation at issue in this case, what difficult choice would the Port Authority face?

A Question of Ethics-The IDDR Approach and Discharge by Operation of Law. Lisa Goldstein reserved space for a marriage ceremony in a building owned by Orensanz Events, LLC, in New York City. The rental agreement provided that on cancellation of the event "for any reason beyond Owner's control," the client's sole remedy was another date for the event or a refund. Shortly before the wedding, the New York City Department of Buildings found Orensanz's building to be structurally unstable and ordered it vacated. The owner closed it and told Goldstein to find another venue. She filed a suit in a New York state court against Orensanz for breach of contract, arguing that the city's order had been for a cause within the defendant's control.

(a) Is the owner of a commercial building ethically obligated to keep it structurally sound? Apply the IDDR approach in the context of the Goldstein case to answer this question.

(b) Is a contracting party ethically obligated to "relax" the terms of the deal if the other party encounters "trouble" in performing them? Discuss.

A Question of Ethics-The IDDR Approach and Arbitration. John McAdams is a tenured professor of political science at Marquette University. McAdams posted a comment on his blog criticizing Cheryl Abbate, a philosophy instructor, for ber interchange with a student in her Theory of Ethics class. Lynn Turner, also a member of the faculty, expressed a negative opinion of McAdams's comment in a letter to the Marquette Tribune. Meanwhile, on Abbate's complaint, the university convened the Faculty Hearing Committee (FHC)_which consists entirely of faculty members, including Turner-to consider the case. Acting on the FHC's recommendation, Marquette suspended McAdams for a semester without pay and ordered him to apologize to Abbate. He refused, and filed a suit in a Wisconsin state court against Marquette. [McAdams v. Marquette University, $383$ Wis.$2$d $358$, $914$ N. W.$2$d $708$ $(2018$)] (See Alternative Dispute Resolution.)

• Apply the IDDR approach to consider the ethics of Marquette's convening of the FHC in McAdams's case.
• From a legal perspective, was the university's disciplinary procedure the functional equivalent of arbitration, limiting McAdams's right to litigate his claim in court? Explain.