Question I – Claire is severely injured in a car accident.  The local hospital cannot treat Claire’s injuries.  In order to survive, Claire must be flown via Helicopter to a hospital in a bordering state.  Prior to boarding the helicopter, Claire signs a contract obligating her to pay for the helicopter flight and all of its expenses.  Claire lives and fully recovers.  However, she is being sued by the helicopter company in the amount of $50,000 for the helicopter transportation and its accompanying expenses.  What is argument Claire could make in order to rescind the agreement?  Does it matter that the helicopter company performed its obligation under the contract?

Question II – Sheila Seller and Bobby Buyer enter into a contract where Bobby agrees to buy widgets for $0.10/unit at 500 units per shipment.  The contract states that there shall be a minimum of 6 shipments between the parties.  Bobby’s payments are late on the first 3 shipments, and Bobby does not make the payment on the 4th shipment.  In the parties’ contract is a liquidation clause, which states that if either side is unable to perform his or her duties under the contract, then the other party shall receive damages in the amount of $100,000.  Should the court enforce this liquidated damages clause?”
For Kim Woods Only “Each response should be between 500-600 words.  A minimum of one peer reviewed reference needs to be used in the development of each answer. Include at least 2 properly cited reference

  1. Define and discuss the term “”ethics”” from your own perspective
  2. Explain and Discuss Kant’s categorical imperative. How appropriate are his views in today’s criminal justice field?
  3. Differentiate between the various typologies of interrogatory deception. Which type do you think would be problematic for an officer to engage in morally? Legally?