1. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, where goods (tangible personal property) are not of "fair and merchantable quality," they will support a claim for a breach of the implied warranty of merchantablility. All of the injuries described in this scenario provide potential claims for breach of warranty. However, the better claim is for negligence, because a breach of warranty claim will only provide damages in the amount of the contract price, which is the value of the meals purchased, and possibly the medical bills. Whereas a negligence action would support damages for pain and suffering in addition to the cost of the food and medical.
2. Under the Statute of Frauds, a contract for the transfer of an interest in real property for more than one year must be in writing. An exception exists where the purchaser takes possession and makes improvements. Here, Mary never signed the agreement with Mark, so Mark cannot enforce the agreement against Mary, unless she either admits to having made the agreement with Mark. Mary, however could enforce the agreement against Mark, because he signed the napkin. However, Mark may be able to rescind out of the agreement if he can show by clear and convincing evidence that Mary knew that the project was more difficult than Mark imagined and that the value of Mary's property would not reasonably cover Mark's costs in undertaking the construction.
3. Roberto's only true recourse is to obtain liability insurance for his errors and omissions associated with actions as a director. This is true, even though the corporation must indemnify directors for acting in good faith upon well informed business judgment, because, ultimately, the corporation may be unable to pay a damage award against Roberto.
4. In most nations, the first person to patent an invention is entitled to prevent others from profiting from that invention, even though they may have actuall developed the invention before the patent owner. In the USA, the first person to invent is entitled to priority, even over the first person to file a patent for the same invention.
Monty is thus protected under U.S. law, however he will be unable to protect his invention worldwide. Monty can exercise his rights against the thief for using the stolen information in violation of State trade secret laws, at least in U.S. jurisdictions. However, outside the USA, Monty would be unable to prevent the thief from using the information, unless it is used a manner that is not related to the patented invention.
5. Workers compensation is available to an employee who is injured while acting within the scope of employment. Sam was apparently on vacation when he met with the clients to play golf. Therefore, he could not recover under workers compensation, because the golf game was not during an employment-related sales meeting. However, Sam can sue the person who hit him with the ball under a common-law negligence theory.