Reference no: EM133418893

Question 1. Robert Bolus was engaged in various businesses in which he sold and repaired trucks. He decided to build a truck repair facility in Bartonsville, Pennsylvania. Bolus contacted United Penn Bank (Bank) to obtain financing for the project and was referred to Emmanuel Ziobro, an assistant vice president. Ziobro orally agreed that Bank would provide funding for the project. He did not tell Bolus that he only had express authority to make loans of up to $10,000. After extending $210,000 in loans to Bolus, Bank refused to provide further financing. When Bolus defaulted on the loans, Bank pressed judgment against Bolus. Bank sought to recover Bolus's assets in payment for the loan. Bolus sued Bank for damages for breach of contract. Who wins?

Question 2. Marc Brandon worked for Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. (Warner), as vice-president of antipiracy internet operations. Brandon drove his car from his home in southern California to the Burbank Airport, where he parked his car in an airport parking lot. Brandon then flew to a threeday conference he attended in Sunnyvale, California, that was sponsored by one of Warner's antipiracy vendors. Warner approved Brandon's trip and paid for his airfare, hotel, and airport parking. When Brandon left the conference, he flew back to the Burbank Airport, where he retrieved his car from the parking lot. On his way home from the airport, his route took him past his Warner office location. He continued on toward his house, using his normal route from the office to his home. Brandon did not stop at his Warner office. Approximately two or three miles past the office, he was involved in an automobile collision with Jared Southard. One or both cars struck and injured pedestrians Chuenchomporn Jeewarat, Tipphawan Tantisriyanurak, and Kanhathai Vutthicharoen. Vutthicharoen died as a result of her injuries. Jeewarat, Tantisriyanurak, and Vutthicharoen's heirs sued Brandon, Southard, and Warner to recover damages for negligence and respondeat superior. Warner filed a motion for summary judgment, alleging that because Brandon was taking his normal route home, Warner was protected from liability by the coming and going rule. Does the coming and going rule protect Warner from liability?