Competency Assessment: (CU1 M3)

In a three-page Microsoft Word Docx or rtf file format document, please respond to the three situations below.  Be thorough and complete in your responses.  Use references to support your position:

1. In 1983 Hustler magazine, owned by publisher Larry Flynt, ran a print advertisement patterned after a Campari liquor ad campaign. The real ad campaign featured celebrities “talking about their first time” in a question-and-answer interview format, slowly revealing that the celebrities were speaking about their first time drinking Campari. The Hustler advertisement featured fundamentalist preacher Jerry Falwell, who was running a campaign against pornography at the time, and insinuated that Falwell had lost his virginity to his mother. Falwell sued Flynt and the magazine, and a jury awarded Falwell $150,000 in damages. The verdict was overturned by the Supreme Court on grounds of the First Amendment, holding that as a public figure, Falwell had to endure the advertisement. [8] Do you believe that celebrities and public figures should have a harder time winning IIED lawsuits? Why or why not?

2. In January 2001 a New York man attended a family birthday party at a Benihana restaurant, where chefs, while cooking at the table, routinely throw pieces of food for diners to catch with their mouths. The man wrenched his neck while ducking a piece of flying shrimp, requiring treatment by several doctors. By that summer, doctors determined surgery was necessary to treat numbness in his arm. Five months after surgery, he checked into the hospital with a high fever and died. The family sued Benihana for $10 million in damages, claiming that the fever was the result of surgery, which in turn was the result of the chef’s actions in throwing food at diners. Do you believe that Benihana should be liable for the man’s death? Why or why not?

3. Is the risk of death from smoking a commonly known danger? It may be today, but in the fifties and sixties, the tobacco industry undertook an extraordinary campaign to convince the public that there was no harm in smoking cigarettes, and even suggested that smoking may have health benefits.

See HERE (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. (Webpage) for a collection of some of the print advertising from this era. Should older plaintiffs who grew up viewing these advertisements be allowed to sue tobacco companies under strict product liability? Why or why not?

Your response should be typed, double-spaced on a standard-sized document (8.5" x 11") with 1" margins on all sides. You should use a clear font that is highly readable. APA recommends using 12 pt. Times New Roman font. Citations should be in APA format.

Points
12
Submitting
a file upload
DueForAvailable fromUntil
N/AEveryoneN/AN/A

Rubric

  
Module 3 Assessment
Module 3 Assessment
CriteriaRatingsPts
IIED
4pts = Author thoroughly understands IIED and applies concepts to the scenario presented with great detail. 3pts = Author evaluates IIED and loosely applies concepts to the situation presented. 2pts = Author explains IIED but fails to fully connect IIED to the scenario presented. 1pt = Author mentions IIED but fails to connect to the scenario presented. 0pts = Insufficient
4.0 pts
Competent: exceeds expectations
3.0 pts
Competent: meets expectations
2.0 pts
Progressing
1.0 pts
Unsatisfactory
0.0 pts
Insufficient
4.0 pts
Liability
4pts = Author thoroughly describes Liability and relates to situation presented. 3pts = Author addresses Liability and relates to Benihana example 2pts = Author shows signs of understanding Liability and relates to Benihana example. 1pt = Author does not understand Liability. 0pts = Insufficient
4.0 pts
Competent: exceeds expectations
3.0 pts
Competent: meets expectations
2.0 pts
Progressing
1.0 pts
Unsatisfactory
0.0 pts
Insufficient
4.0 pts
Strict Product Liability
4pts = Author synthesizes knowledge and discusses strict liability regarding smoking example. Author is thorough. 3pts = Author synthesizes knowledge and discusses strict liability regarding smoking example. Author is thorough. 2pts = Author loosely evaluates Strict Liability and relates to smoking example. 1pt = Author does not Strict Liability. 0pts = Insufficient
4.0 pts
Competent: exceeds expectations
3.0 pts
Competent: meets expectations
2.0 pts
Progressing
1.0 pts
Unsatisfactory
0.0 pts
Insufficient
4.0 pts
 This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCourse Outcome 01: Explain the origins of the American legal system.
threshold: 3.0 pts
4.0 pts
Competent: Exceeds expectations
3.0 pts
Competent: Meets expectations
2.0 pts
Progressing
1.0 pts
Unsatisfactory
0.0 pts
Insufficient
-- 
 This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCourse Outcome 02: Apply elements of law to specific individual and business scenarios.
threshold: 3.0 pts
4.0 pts
Competent: Exceeds expectations
3.0 pts
Competent: Meets expectations
2.0 pts
Progressing
1.0 pts
Unsatisfactory
0.0 pts
Insufficient
-- 
Total Points: 12.0

Last modified: Tuesday, 29 May 2018, 2:03 PM