LEG 500 Week 8 Discussion
Rules of an Employer" Please respond to the following:
Two stockbrokers, in clear violation of the rules of their employer, sold worthless stocks to unsuspecting customers. There was no question that the brokers had the actual or implied authority to sell the stock. The customers who lost money sued the brokerage firm, contending it was liable for their losses because the brokers had apparent authority. Based on this scenario, debate whether or not you believe these stockbrokers had apparent authority. Next, speculate on how the outcome of the customer’s suit against the brokers will turn out. Explain your rationale.
Rules of an Employer" Please respond to the following:
Two stockbrokers, in clear violation of the rules of their employer, sold worthless stocks to unsuspecting customers. There was no question that the brokers had the actual or implied authority to sell the stock. The customers who lost money sued the brokerage firm, contending it was liable for their losses because the brokers had apparent authority. Based on this scenario, debate whether or not you believe these stockbrokers had apparent authority. Next, speculate on how the outcome of the customer’s suit against the brokers will turn out. Explain your rationale.
Rules of an Employer" Please respond to the following:
- Two stockbrokers, in clear violation of the rules of their employer, sold worthless stocks to unsuspecting customers. There was no question that the brokers had the actual or implied authority to sell the stock. The customers who lost money sued the brokerage firm, contending it was liable for their losses because the brokers had apparent authority. Based on this scenario, debate whether or not you believe these stockbrokers had apparent authority. Next, speculate on how the outcome of the customer’s suit against the brokers will turn out. Explain your rationale.
Rules of an Employer" Please respond to the following:
- Two stockbrokers, in clear violation of the rules of their employer, sold worthless stocks to unsuspecting customers. There was no question that the brokers had the actual or implied authority to sell the stock. The customers who lost money sued the brokerage firm, contending it was liable for their losses because the brokers had apparent authority. Based on this scenario, debate whether or not you believe these stockbrokers had apparent authority. Next, speculate on how the outcome of the customer’s suit against the brokers will turn out. Explain your rationale.
Rules of an Employer" Please respond to the following:
- Two stockbrokers, in clear violation of the rules of their employer, sold worthless stocks to unsuspecting customers. There was no question that the brokers had the actual or implied authority to sell the stock. The customers who lost money sued the brokerage firm, contending it was liable for their losses because the brokers had apparent authority. Based on this scenario, debate whether or not you believe these stockbrokers had apparent authority. Next, speculate on how the outcome of the customer’s suit against the brokers will turn out. Explain your rationale.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.