Reference no: EM133192252

Select two of the scenarios listed below and explain the best solution for each. Include comments related to any ethical issues ethical issues that arise. You should locate at least one scholarly source from the SUO Library or one case that has been decided or is currently pending to support your answer.

Scenario 1 - Offers

Kelly's collie puppy ran off, so she posts flyers in the neighborhood advertising a reward of $100 for finding and returning the dog. David finds a collie puppy on his front porch. He looks at the dog tags, calls the number, and Kelly rushes over to pick up her puppy. Later, David sees the reward poster.

Can David claim the reward? Provide arguments for each party. Support the answer with a relevant journal article or case.

Scenario 2 - Consideration

Jackson was hired to sell consulting services for Acme Accounting and was promoted to manager four months later. A short time after the promotion, Jackson was required to sign a non-compete agreement. When the business suffered financially, Jackson joined with a former employee to create an accounting firm that also solicited clients for consulting business. Acme sued Jackson to enforce the agreement.
What was the consideration for signing the non-compete agreement? If you find consideration, was it adequate?

Would your answer change if Jackson had to sign the non-compete at the time of his promotion?

Scenario 3 Capacity and Legality

Hank was a talented soccer player and started playing competitively in 2014 when he was sixteen. Many of the tournaments required participants to sign an exculpatory clause in order to participate. One of Hank's parents signed the agreements. In 2016, Hank participated in the regional soccer championships in Atlanta Georgia. During the event, several players crashed into each other and Hank sustained an injury to his back, leaving him partially paralyzed. Hank filed a negligence lawsuit against the tournament organizers. The organizers could not find the exculpatory clause that Hank signed for the event. The organizers argued that Hank must have signed the agreement to enter the tournament, but even if he had not signed one, his participation in the event demonstrated his intent to be bound by the terms of the agreement.

Did Hank have contractual capacity to enter the contract? Why or why not?

If Hank did not actually sign the exculpatory clause, could a court conclude that he impliedly accepted its terms by participating in the tournament? Why or why not?

How would you rule in both of these situations? Support your answer with scholarly material and case law.