Write-respon

Hi,

Please use legal reasoning to respond to this question.

There are 2 issues please write 2 FIRACs:

Buckley is the president of ChemCorp Industries, Inc., a chemical manufacturing company. An inspection by Dorrit, a government agent, uncovers leaking hazardous waste storage and disposal containers in the company’s warehouse caused by Ervin, a ChemCorp employee. Fitzroy, a ChemCorp vice president, assures Dorrit that the situation will be corrected, but a later inspection finds that the containers are still leaking and no clean up has been done. Buckley knows nothing about any of this.

Question #1: Can ChemCorp be convicted of a crime in these circumstances?

Question #2: Can Buckley be held personally liable?

Issue #1 FIRAC

Facts

1.environmental violations

2.not corrected by Vice President

Issue

Whether corporation is criminally liable for actions of its employees

when the employee perpetrated a crime by failing to correct environmental law violations?

Rule: Corporate Criminal Liability

1.Crime committed by employee within the course and scope of employment, or

2.Crime ordered by corporation

Analysis:

1.course and scope

the VP had the responsibility to correct violations t the corporation’s facility

The VP failed to make the corrections

Conclusion:

Yes. The corporation is criminally liable for actions of its employees when the employee perpetrated a crime by failing to correct environmental law violations

Issue #2 FIRAC

Facts

1.VP perpetrated a crime when he failed to correct environmental law violations

2.CEO knew nothing about the violations nor the crime

Issue:

Whether the CEO is criminally lable for the crimes committed by the VP

when she knew nothing about the violations nor the crime

Rule: Responsible Corporate Officer Doctrine

1.A Corporate Officer is criminally liable for crimes

2.committed by corporations employees

Analysis:

1.A Corporate Officer

The CEO is a corporate officer responsible for the corporations activities

2.CEO knew nothing

It is irrelevant whether the CEO knew of the criminal activities of the corporations employees

Conclusion:

Yes. The CEO is criminally liable for the crimes committed by the VP even when she knew nothing about the violations nor the crime

Guide to Applying Legal Reasoning to Any Situation

When asked to apply legal reasoning to a fact pattern, please follow this outline.

FACTS:
Identify and list the key facts, selected from the information presented to you. (Short bulleted list)

ISSUE:
Write the question of law raised by the facts; include one or more facts to put the question into the context of the current situation. (One sentence)

RULE OF LAW:
Identify and describe the rule of law or common law principle applicable to the issue, from the material covered in the relevant chapter. (One sentence, NOT a statute or constitutional provision!)

ANALYSIS (application):
Using the key elements of the rule of law you just wrote to structure your analysis, apply the facts to each element and determine whether each element has been met by a fact. (One sentence for each element)

CONCLUSION:
Using the language of the issue, write an affirmative statement answering the question raised by the issue. (One sentence, just like the issue sentence)

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.