Which of the following are public-policy exceptions recognized by ...

[silviawilliams41]

Which of the following are public-policy exceptions recognized by most states as limits to the employment-at-will doctrine allowing termination of employees?
 a. refusing to commit an illegal act
  b. performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty)
  c. exercising freedom of speech rights
  d. refusing to commit and illegal act and performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty)
  e. refusing to commit and illegal act and performing a public duty (reporting for jury duty) and exercising freedom of speech rights

Question 2

Fair Debt Collection. CrossCheck, Inc, provides check-authorization services to retail merchants. When a customer presents a check, the merchant contacts CrossCheck, which es-timates the probability that the check will clear the bank. If the check is within an acceptable statistical range, CrossCheck notifies the merchant. If the check is dishonored, the merchant sends it to CrossCheck, which pays it. CrossCheck then attempts to redeposit the check. If this fails, CrossCheck takes further steps to collect the amount. CrossCheck attempts to collect on more than two thousand checks per year and spends 2 million on these efforts, which involve about 7 percent of its employees and 6 percent of its total expenses. William Winterstein took his truck to C&P Auto Service Center, Inc, for a tune-up and paid for the service with a check. C&P contacted CrossCheck and, on its recommendation, accepted the check. When the check was dishonored, C&P mailed it to CrossCheck, which reimbursed C&P and sent a letter to Winterstein requesting payment. Winterstein filed a suit in a federal district court against CrossCheck, asserting that the letter violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. CrossCheck filed a motion for summary judgment. On what ground might the court grant the motion? Explain.

[dawsa925]

Answer to Question 1

d

Answer to Question 2

Fair debt collection
CrossCheck argued that it was not a debt collector within the meaning of the FDCPA. If the court had accepted this argument, it might have ruled in CrossCheck's favor. The court concluded, however, that there are disputes of material fact concerning CrossCheck's status as a debt collector' under the FDCPA and denied the motion. The court quoted the FDCPA's definition of debt collector: any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another. This is a two-part test. The first part is whether a person is principally engaged in the business of debt collection. The second part is whether a person regularly collects or attempts to collect . . . debts owed or due . . . another. The court found that CrossCheck is not principally in the business of debt collection: Only seven percent of Cross-Check's employees engage in direct recovery or collection efforts, and only six percent of CrossCheck's total expenses are allocated to recovery or collection efforts. The court concluded, however, that because CrossCheck attempts to collect on more than 2,000 checks per year and spends 2 million on debt collection efforts, there is at least a genuine dispute concerning whether CrossCheck regularly attempts to collect . . . debts owed or due . . . another' on a regular basis.