ACCT 215

Law Exam 2

actus reus

a criminal or guilty ACT

mens rea

a criminal or guilty MIND

model penal code

1. purpose

2. knowledge

3. recklessness

4. negligence

actual authority

acting with the direct knowledge and permission of the corporation

apparent authority

the employee was authorized by the company to act in a certain manner because of representations made by corporation of a 3rd party

state vs. casey’s

• cashier sells alcohol to minor

• casey’s claims it was cashier’s wrongdoing

• casey’s held criminally liable

responsible corporate officer doctrine

officers may be criminally liable for criminal acts of employees

us vs. park

• john park was charged and convicted of violating the federal food, drug, and cosmetics act

• allowed food stored in warehouses (contaminated by rodents) to be shipped in interstate commerce

violent crimes

• homicide

• rape

• assault

property crimes

• burglary

• larceny

• arson

• forgery

public-order crimes

• intoxication

• prostitution

cybercrimes

• hacking

• phishing

felony

serious crime that is punishable by death or imprisonment for MORE than one year

misdemeanor

a lesser than a felony, punishable by a fine or incarceration in jail for UP to one year

ponzi scheme

an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors

embezzlement

type of theft that occurs when a fiduciary is lawfully entrusted with personal property of another and then fraudulently takes/uses that property for their own gain

fraud

knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to their detriment

mail fraud

using postal services

wire fraud

using phone or other electronic means of communication

bankruptcy fraud

concealing assets from bankruptcy proceedings

perjury

telling an untruth while under oath to tell the truth

insider trading

the purchase or sales of securities on the basis of inside information

money laundering

transferring illegally obtained money through legitimate people or accounts so that its original source cannot be traced

theft

1. taking the property of another

2. interfering with the use of it

larceny

stealing tangible property with the intent to deprive the owner of the property

robbery

taking of property by force, intimidation, or threat of violence with the intent to deprive the owner of the property.

burglary

breaking and entering into the dwelling house of another at nighttime with the intent to commit a felony

arson

malicious burning of the dwelling of another person

forgery

making or altering a writing with the intent to defraud

obtaining goods by false pretenses

intentionally misrepresenting a material fact to a person in order ro persuade another to transfer property

extortion

wrongdoing using a public office to obtain assets from a victim

blackmail

wrongdoing obtaining assets by threat

criminal trespass

defendant knowingly interferes another’s property

criminal mischief

intentionally causing damage to another’s property

hacking

unauthorized access of another’s computer with intent to change the settings or access information

phishing

accessing another’s computer or personal information through electronic deception with the intent to use that information to commit a fraud

credit card fraud

using credit card information to obtain an unauthorized benefit

identity theft

to knowingly transfer or use another person’s identity without authorization with the intent to commit a crime

justification

society generally condones or approves of the act under the circumstance

excuse

society does not condone but determines punishment is less appropriate because of mitigating circumstances

self defense

a person may be justified in using force against another person. while a person can use force to protect themselves from a real attack, the force must be reasonable and not excessive under circumstances

castle doctrine

can use lethal force without retreating if attacked in your own home

stand your ground laws

can use lethal force without retreat if acting in self-defense

involuntary intoxication

intoxication on the part of the defendant was not intentional

voluntary intoxication

intoxication was brought about by the defendant’s intentional acts

5th amendment

protection from double jeopardy (can’t be tried for the same crime twice if found not guilty the second time)

6th amendment

right to a speedy/public trial

search warrant

an order granted by a public authority that authorizes law enforcement personnel to search particular premises or property

probably cause

reasonable grounds to believe that evidence of a crime is currently located in the place or on the person to be searched

4th amendment

protection against unreasonable search and seizure

exclusionary rule

any evidence that is obtained in violation of the accused’s constitutional rights is automatically excluded at trial

arrest

need a warrant unless there is no time to get one

initial appearance

defendant appears before judge

arraignment

court proceeding in which defendant hears charges in court and enters a plea

plea bargaining

the defendant and prosecution enter into a deal and the defendant gets a more lenient sentence

intentional tort

a wrongful act that was knowingly committed

unintentional tort

a wrongful act that was not knowingly committed

tortfeasor

one who commits a tort

tort of negligence

when the plaintiff is injured because of defendant’s breach of a duty of care

reasonable care

duty to act with reasonable care towards others based upon a reasonable person standard

causation in fact

act or omission caused the damage

proximate cause

strong enough connection to justify holding the defendant responsible

negligence per se

• plaintiff was owed a duty of care under a statute

• the defendant committed the conduct prohibited by the statute in question

• statute was designed to prevent this type of injury

nuisance

an unreasonable interference with another property owner’s use of their property

private nuisance

defendant’s use of their property interferes with the plaintiff’s use of their property

public nuisance

defendant’s use of their property substantially interferes with a right commonly held by the public

strict liability

courts may impose strict liability when defendants engage in severely dangerous activities

strict product liability

manufacturers and distributors are held to strict liability for product defects

assult

actions intended to make another person fearful of immediate physical harm

battery

the un-consented to and intentional touching of another person which results in harmful contact or offensive contact

false imprisonment

the intentional confinement or restraint of another person’s activities without justification

defamation

wrongfully hurting a person’s good reputation by stating an untruth

slander of property

defendant makes untrue statements which decrease the value of plaintiff’s property

slander of title

defendant makes untrue statements which cause a 3rd party to doubt the plaintiff’s ownership of the property

trespass

when a person without permission enters above or below the surface or causes something to enter above or below the surface of another’s real property

invitee

must warn of hidden risks and make hazardous situations safe

licensee

must warn of potentially dangerous situations

danger invites rescue

dangerous situation required action

trespass to personal property

interfering with the use of another’s personal property

conversion

the unlawful taking of another’s property

requirements of fraud

1. defendant made a misrepresentation

2. defendant knew of the deception

3. defendant intended to influence the plaintiff to act or refrain from acting

4. plaintiff justifiably relied on the defendant’s misrepresentation

5. plaintiff was damaged as a result

compensatory damages

compensate plaintiff for loss suffered

special damages

costs incurred out of pocket

general damages

not calculated by a precise model but meant to compensate plaintiff

nominal damages

small amount of damages meant to establish liability

punitive damages

meant to punish defendant not necessarily compensate plaintiff

liquidated damages

damages required by state statute and awarded in tort cases

intellectual property

products of a person’s creative spirit. intangible in nature (patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets)

patent

the legal right to exclude all others from making, using, selling, or importing the invention during the term of the patent

negative right

the right to legally exclude others from performing certain acts

utility patent

covers the way something works, how the pieces interact

plant patent

covers strains of asexually reproducing plants

design patent

covers ornamental features of a product

prior art

existing information or concepts which prove the invention is not novel or new

direct infringement

patented technology is made, used, sold, or offered for sale without permission of the patent holder

indirect infringement

when knowledge exists of the patent and can arise in two days

first sale doctrine

once sold, the buyer can use the patented product in any manner they choose

copyright

exclusive right to exploit certain creative works

parody

can be copyrighted but a copyright holder cannot sue the creator of a parody of their work

idea-expression dichotomy

if an idea cannot be separated from its expression, then no copyright protection