Bus Law

1.Brendan Bosse and Michael Griffin were part of a group of four teenagers eatinga meal at a Chilis restaurant in Dedham, Massachusetts. Chilis is owned byBrinker Restaurant Corporation (collectively Chilis). The cost of the mealwas $56. The teenagers decided not to pay. They went out of the building, gotin their car, and drove away, heading northward up Route 1. A patron of therestaurant saw the teenagers leave without payment. He followed them in hiswhite sport-utility vehicle (SUV). The teenagers saw him following them. Ahigh-speed chase ensued through Dedham side streets. The patron used his cellphone to call the Chilis manager. The manager called 911 and reported theincident and the location of the car chase. The teenagers car collided with acement wall, and Bosse and Griffin were seriously injured. The Chilis patrondrove past the crash scene and was never identified. Bosse and Griffin suedChilis for compensatory damages for their injuries. The plaintiffs argued thatthe patron was an agent of Chilis, and therefore Chilis was liable to theplaintiffs, based on the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holdsa principal liable for the acts of its agents. Chilis filed a motion forsummary judgment, arguing that the patron was not its agent. Is the restaurantpatron who engaged in the high-speed car chase an agent of Chilis?

2.The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power maintains a pension plan for itsemployees that is funded by both employer and employee contributions. The planpays men and women retirees pensions with the same monthly benefits. However,because statistically women live, on average, several years longer than men,female employees are required to make monthly contributions to the pension fundthat are 14.84 percent higher than the contributions required of maleemployees. Because employee contributions are withheld from paychecks, a femaleemployee takes home less pay than a male employee earning the same salary. Doesthis practice violate Title VII?

3.Immar Medrano was employed as a journeyman electrician by Marshall ElectricalContracting, Inc. (MEC), in Marshall, Missouri. Medrano attended an electricianapprenticeship night class at a community college in Sedalia, Missouri. MECpaid Medranos tuition and book fees. Attendance at the course required Medranoto drive 70 miles round-trip. One night, when Medrano was driving home from theclass, a drunk driver crossed the center line of U.S. Highway 65 and collidedhead-on with Medranos automobile. Medrano died in the accident. His wife andtwo children filed a workers compensation claim for death benefits againstMEC. Are Medranos actions at the time of the automobile accident within thecourse and scope of his employment, thus entitling him to workers compensationbenefits?

4. Theunion (Union) member-employees of the Erie Resistor Company (Company) struckCompany over the terms of a new collective bargaining agreement that was beingnegotiated between Company and Union. Company continued production operationsduring the strike by hiring new hires and crossover union members who werepersuaded to abandon the strike and come back to work. Company promised allreplacement workers super seniority. This would take the form of adding twentyyears to the length of a workers actual service for the purpose of futurelayoffs and recalls. Many union members accepted the offer. Union filed anunfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). IsCompanys offer of the super seniority lawful?