Question: Plaintiffs purchased state lottery tickets and were winners along with
Plaintiffs purchased state lottery tickets and were winners along with 76 others. The state had advertised that $1,750,000 would be the prize, but it distributed only $744,471. Plaintiff sued the lottery director, alleging fraud in the conduct of the lottery. The state lottery law provides for administrative hearings upon complaints charging violations of the lottery law or of regulations there under. It also allows any party adversely affected by a final order of the administrative agency to seek judicial review. Must the plaintiffs exhaust their administrative remedies? Why or why not?
Answer to relevant QuestionsDescribe four types of costs that businesses must absorb due to the regulatory process. a) Name the four sanctions used to enforce the Sherman Act. (b) What is the relationship between the criminal sanction and suits for triple damages? (c) What is the impact of the nolo contendere plea? (a) Why is it important for courts to use the rule of reason analysis when considering actions allegedly in violation of the Sherman Act? (b) What is the significance of the per se analysis under the rule of reason? Types of ...What was the primary way the Sarbanes-Oxley Act increased the authority and capabilities of the SEC? Donna, a corporate director, sold 100 shares of stock in her corporation on June 1, 2007. The selling price was $10.50 a share. Two months later, after the corporation had announced substantial losses for the second quarter ...
Post your question