Any girl little stressed out of assignment after long day wanna have little fun before going to bed? So if you down?

John novosel was employed by nationwide insurance company for fifteen years. novosel had been a model employee and, at the time of discharge, was a district claims manager and a candidate for the position of division claims manager. during novosel's fifteenth year of employment, nationwide circulated a memorandum requesting the participation of all employees in an effort to lobby the pennsylvania state legislature for the passage of a certain bill before the body. novosel, who had privately indicated his disagreement with nationwide's political views, refused to lend his support to the lobby, and his employment with nationwide was terminated. novosel brought two separate claims against nationwide, arguing, first, that his discharge for refusing to lobby the state legislature on behalf of nationwide constituted the tort of wrongful discharge in that it was arbitrary, malicious, and contrary to public policy. novosel also contended that nationwide breached an implied contract guaranteeing continued employment so long as his job performance was satisfactory. what decision as to each claim?

Problem 9-5. net present value and taxes [lo 1, 2] penguin productions is evaluating a film project. the president of penguin estimates that the film will cost $20,000,000 to produce. in its first year, the film is expected to generate $16,500,000 in net revenue, after which the film will be released to video. video is expected to generate $10,000,000 in net revenue in its first year, $2,500,000 in its second year, and $1,000,000 in its third year. for tax purposes, amortization of the cost of the film will be $12,000,000 in year 1 and $8,000,000 in year 2. the company’s tax rate is 35 percent, and the company requires a 12 percent rate of return on its films. required what is the net present value of the film project? to simplify, assume that all outlays to produce the film occur at time 0. should the company produce the film?

In december of 2004, the company you own entered into a 20-year contract with a grain supplier for daily deliveries of grain to its hot dog bun manufacturing facility. the contract called for "10,000 pounds of grain" to be delivered to the facility at the price of $100,000 per day. until february 2017, the supplier provided processed grain which could easily be used in your manufacturing process. however, no longer wanting to absorb the cost of having the grain processed, the supplier began delivering whole grain. the supplier is arguing that the contract does not specify the type of grain that would be supplied and that it has not breached the contract. your company is arguing that the supplier has an onsite processing plant and processed grain was implicit to the terms of the contract. over the remaining term of the contract, reshipping and having the grain processed would cost your company approximately $10,000,000, opposed to a cost of around $1,000,000 to the supplier. after speaking with in-house counsel, it was estimated that litigation would cost the company several million dollars and last for years. weighing the costs of litigation, along with possible ambiguity in the contract, what are three options you could take to resolve the dispute? which would be the best option for your business and why?