Pacific Heights

The couple in this movie forgot some very important rules when they allowed this man to basically squat on their property. For one they didn't run a credit check. When they tried to do a background check it didn't pass. They allowed him to move in (kind of unwillingly on their part) without paying any rent or deposit. The most important thing they forgot to do was sign a lease. He can basically do whatever he wants because there is no contract between the land lord and the tenant. In this case the couple didn’t have a chance to say whether he was or wasn’t allowed in the home. He established that he was going to be staying in the home whether they liked it or not. Without signing any sort of lease agreement though you would think the landlords would have more rights than this tenant does. From what it seems everyone is against them. They are the ones who are truly in favor. The fact of the matter is that the landlords should have all access to the space they are renting without question. The tenant changed the locks which is probably another violation of the law. The tenant promised money up front assuring them that they would be paid a full sixth month’s rent when in reality he probably had no intention of ever paying. When the land lords turned off the lights and the heat the “tenant” called the police. The police said the tenant had every right to be there. The land lords were in the wrong for not providing him with heat and electricity. The tenant also violated the quiet rule. He was drilling and hammering at all hours disturbing the peace. Maybe laws have changed since then. Hopefully more intelligent people that will think before they buy property and maybe they will ensure they have sufficient funds to cover the mortgage if something were to happen.

Bobble Head Octopulett Mother

I don't know who I would create a bobble head if I could. Perhaps I would create a bobble head of the number of people who continuously throw their garbage and cigarettes out the window. People who drive so fast and so recklessly they will hopefully be pulled over by the next state trooper and cited for reckless driving and endangerment, as well as stupidity. I think I would create one of the women who have captured news headlines for the 14 children she has mothered. She continuously grabs news headlines with the "Octopulett mother's home in foreclosure” “Octuplet mother wishes she could have been on Oprah”. This lady needs a bobble head with eight hammers (one for each baby to hold). I question her motives for having so many children without being financially stable. The lady doesn’t have a full time job, husband, or even home to put these poor children. I think I would also create one of the doctors who allowed such a thing to happen with the knowledge the mother wasn’t fully capable of taking care of the children. Every one of the children may have suffered some sort of disability because of this. Or maybe I would create a bobble head of the people that continually run the stories about these women and her children. I understand it’s an amazing story and a sad one at that. It’s time to cover real news so I would give the news team a bobble heads for this reason. Why not cover something significant like the war in Iraq something worthy of time and energy. Why not focus on something positive I understand it’s a true miracle that these babies survived and it will be another miracle if she can keep them all alive and well for the next 18 years of their lives.

Greed Is Good!

GREED IS GOOD
Greed is good? Or is it? The question comes to mind when considering we are in a world and a nation of people who are out to make a buck. Have times changed though? Are people starting to realize the light that money and things don’t make a person better. I once heard from a man who lost everything he had. Dave Ramsey, well renowned financial analyst and talk show host, bought a ton of real estate when he was 21 years old. He was a millionaire by the time he was 26. By age 30 he was broke! He and his wife had a small baby and were flat broke. People were suing him over and over again. He became on a first name basis with the man who delivered court orders. Mr. Ramsey began to realize that greed had taken over his life. He was forced to turn his life around the things that he surrounded himself with before became less important and the people around him became more important. He once said who we are really out to impress anyways with all these things and all this money. People who were once powerful bankers and investors are now being uncovered as crooks, thieves, and liars. The big bankers somehow forget all of their moral obligations when money comes into play. “The duty of loyalty means that a director has a legal and ethical obligation to administer to the affairs of corporation with personal integrity, honesty, and candor.” (The Essentials of Business Law, Liuzzo, page 270) Their loyalty become obstructed and their honesty a blur when the dollar signs appear. If these people like Bernie Madoff had considered what life might be like if he had just acted morally would his life possibly be better? We will never know the thoughts of Bernie Madoff. Mr. Madoff is now sitting in his 9 million dollar pent house on house arrest for embezzling 50 billion dollars from investors. “The crime of embezzlement may be defined as wrongful taking of money or other property that has been trusted to a person as part of his or her employment.” (The Essentials of Business Law, Liuzzo, page 36). We wonder if he is contemplating his duty of loyalty and this duty of care to the people he stole money from or if he is just simply sorry he was finally caught after all these years. Greed can be a very dangerous thing. When greed is involved there seems to be no remorse to fault just the victims who are left with empty pockets and broken hearts.

Comments on Grand Theft

The majority of the blog opinions seem to go against the grandmother on her law suit over the explicit sexual content of the Grand Theft Auto video game. Aaron Taylor felt that the same way I did he said. ”I feel as though this grandmother had no right to file suit against the makers of a well-known “provocative, and or damaging” video game. She must have known, not only by the rating of the video game, but also the scenes and graphics covering the packaging that this video game would not be suitable for a 14 year old boy.” (http://thezerostaronline.blogspot.com/ ). In reality though she is 84 and things that are shocking to people younger than the age of 30 are generally more shocking then those who are older and generally haven’t been exposed to that sort of content. On the other hand she did know that there was excessive violence, she was however deceived into thinking that there was that and only that in the video game. Michael Polack agreed with me on this point. “I never saw it from the grandmother’s point of view. The fact is that even if the game needs to be hacked to achieve this content, it’s still available to minors. Anything containing sexual content must be at least rated for views 18 and older; because it was not given this rating Cohen had all the right to attack the makers of the video game.” (http://m3mediadesign.blogspot.com/). We have to think on both sides of the fence sometimes. Some people think she’s wrong, wrong, wrong, and she should just understand that she bought a mature video game for a 14 year old boy knowing it had a least some sort of violence. On the other hand what she wasn’t prepared for was to explain to her 14 year old grandson the sexual content of the game. Some thought that responsible parenting and being a watchful consumer maybe have altered this situation. Roland Copland agrees with this statement. “It’s upsetting to me because all of this would have been avoided if she did research or asked someone at the store she bought the game at for more information about it before purchasing it. I’m assuming she did not read the label that was on the game before she purchased it. And even if she did, she should have seen it coming.” http://flipbeatsproductions.blogspot.com/. So if grandma wasn’t an impulsive buyer she may have avoided her shock and dismay at such games. As consumers and parents we do have to understand what exactly what we are exposing our children too. Rochelle Aquino said it was the grandmothers responsibility to monitor this was well. “Rated R movies show soft-core pornography sometimes and it includes a lot of violence. Now, would the grandmother take her little grandson to watch a movie like that? I wouldn’t think so. It was her own mistake and the company should not have been punished for it.” http://rovegasdesign.blogspot.com/. In response to this I think most people are blamming the grandmother for her inability to understand the product she was purchasing. People aren't blamming the company because it is well know that the game contained very violent acts and it was more of a underground situation that provided the grandson with the sexual content. Point is monitor your children and look at the products you buy.

Used Car Law and Tort List

Jaclyn DonatelliEvelyn LeeBrittany HillSky Diaz
1. Assault
2. Vandalism
3. Assault of a police officer
4. Evading arrest
5. Leaving the scene of an accident
6. Unlicensed driving
7. Attempted murder
8. Reckless driving
9. Speeding
10. Child endangerment
11. Trespassing
12. Driving under the influence
13. Illegal gambling on a sports game
14. Unlicensed transactions
15. Agreements that interfere with public service
16. Transaction of over $500 with out a written agreement
17. Misrepresentation
18. Conspiracy
19. Illegal restraints of trade
20. Negligence
21. Perjury
22. False advertising
23. Destruction of Property
24. Alluding arrest
25. Nuisance
26. Fraud

EOC,Week 3

84-year-old grandmother, Florence Cohen, saw a commercial for the video game "Grand Theft Auto, San Andres." The game depicts very violent and criminal acts including murder, and of course theft. The grandmother went to the store to purchase the game for her 14-year-old grandson. While watching her grandson play the game she saw that there was more sexual explicit content that was not described in the commercial or within the description of the game. She contacted her lawyer and filed a class action lawsuit against the makers of “Rock Star Gaming” for false and misleading practices. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the licensing owners of the game. The grandmother won and was awarded her money back or a newer version of the game that didn’t contain the sexual content.
The grandmother had every right to sue the gaming company. The company was responsible for selling the game under false pretenses. Even thought the game contained murder and criminal activity, things Florence knew about. The company is still responsible for selling the game with the hidden content. The company claims that the content was not supposed to be available on the game it was removed from the game. A code was made available to the consumer to unlock this content. The company claims that someone had to type in the code in order to unlock this content (who unlocked the content in this case is still unknown.) Whether there was a code or not the company is still responsible for selling the game under the false pretenses. “The term false pretenses describes a broad category of crimes that involve activities intended to deceive others by making false claims.” (Essentials of Business Laws, Liuzzo, page 24). In my opinion I think that the grandmother was essentially responsible for purchasing the game. She was aware that the game depicted violent and criminal acts and she still felt this was okay. I don’t quite understand her justifying violence and crime, but not sexual content. I understand that she was upset that she was not aware of the sexual content. If she knew there was some of this content would it have stopped her from buying the game? What in the first place was her mind thought when she purchased the violent game for her impressionable 14-year-old grandson?