In Gieseke v. IDCA, Gieseke formed a company to compete with his old employer and worked with one of the former owners of his old employer in the new company. His former employer moved some of the equipment of the new company and changed its mailing address without permission of Gieseke or his partner. When Gieseke sued his former employer the courts held that the former employer:
A) was not liable in tort as its actions did not go beyond "normal business activities"
B) was not liable as Gieseke was not properly licensed
C) was liable for negligent misrepresentation of Gieseke's business to other parties
D) was liable for interference with prospective contractual relations
E) none of the other choices
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q139: Which of the following is not usually
Q140: If a third party observes a fraud:
A)
Q141: The law of product liability is primarily
Q142: Which tort is concerned with a business
Q143: Key element(s) of the tort of intentional
Q145: In Gieseke v. IDCA, Gieseke formed a
Q146: In Gieseke v. IDCA, Gieseke formed a
Q147: The elements of the tort of intentional
Q148: Key element(s) of the tort of intentional
Q149: In a case of intentional interference with
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents