see attachment
Module Six Case Analysis Guidelines and Rubric.html
BUS 206 Module Six Case Analysis Guidelines and Rubric
Overview
In the case of Lucy v. Zehmer, Zehmer spent the night drinking with his friend Lucy. During the evening, a piece of paper was signed whereby Zehmer agreed to sell his farm to Lucy. In this assignment, you will review the full case study in your textbook, analyze the contractual elements and ruling, and indicate whether you agree with the ruling.
Directions
Read the Lucy v. Zehmer case summary in the “Elements of the Offer” section of Chapter 14 in your textbook. Then analyze the case in relation to contract law.
Specifically, you must address the following rubric criteria:
- Contractual Element: Identify the contractual element that Zehmer argued was missing.
- Court Ruling and Reasoning: Summarize the court ruling and explain the reasoning for the ruling.
- Agree or Disagree: Agree or disagree with the ruling and provide a clear rationale to support your ideas.
- Entering Into a Contract: Summarize a personal experience in which you entered into a contract that you did not think of as a binding contract at the time. Consider which elements of the contract were in place and which were missing.
What to Submit
Submit your case analysis as a Microsoft Word document. Write a 1- to 2-paragraph response for each of the four rubric criteria. Sources should be cited according to APA style.
Module Six Case Analysis Rubric
| Criteria | Exceeds Expectations (100%) | Meets Expectations (85%) | Partially Meets Expectations (55%) | Does Not Meet Expectations (0%) | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contractual Element | Exceeds expectations in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner | Accurately identifies the contractual element that Zehmer argued was missing | Shows progress toward meeting expectations, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include accurately identifying the contractual element that Zehmer argued was missing | Does not attempt criterion | 20 |
| Court Ruling and Reasoning | Exceeds expectations in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner | Summarizes the court’s ruling and accurately explains the reasoning for the ruling | Shows progress toward meeting expectations, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include a more complete summary of the court’s ruling or additional support explaining the reasoning for the ruling | Does not attempt criterion | 20 |
| Agree or Disagree | Exceeds expectations in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner | Agrees or disagrees with the ruling and provides a clear rationale to support ideas | Shows progress toward meeting expectations, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include a clearer statement of agreement or disagreement or a more logical description of the reasoning behind the ruling | Does not attempt criterion | 25 |
| Entering Into a Contract | Exceeds expectations in an exceptionally clear, insightful, or sophisticated manner | Summarizes an experience with a personal contract and considers which elements of the contract were in place and which were missing | Shows progress toward meeting expectations, but with errors or omissions; areas for improvement may include a more complete explanation of the contract or a more accurate identification of the contract elements that were in place or missing | Does not attempt criterion | 25 |
| Clear Communication | Exceeds expectations with an intentional use of language that promotes a thorough understanding | Consistently and effectively communicates in an organized way to a specific audience | Shows progress toward meeting expectations, but communication is inconsistent or ineffective in a way that negatively impacts understanding | Shows no evidence of consistent, effective, or organized communication | 5 |
| Citations and Attributions | Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with few or no minor errors | Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with consistent minor errors | Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with major errors | Does not use citations for ideas requiring attribution | 5 |
| Total: | 100% |
