This is business law class assignment ! 

Its not essay! Its legal reasoning response

Answers does not have to be super long but not too short either 

Below are the guidelines 

---------------------------------------------

A6 Help

 

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 lable for the crimes committed by the VP even when she knew nothing about the violations nor the crime

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just like a guideline format should be like : 

Facts

(Paragraph)

Issue

(Paragraph)

Rule

(Paragraph)

.

.

.

Thank u :)