Question

Globe Life Insurance Company has undertaken a new sales program that targets neighborhoods in Los Angeles where drive-by shootings were a nightly occurrence. Two such shootings occurred in which children were killed as they sat in their living rooms. Globe salespeople were instructed to "hit" the houses surrounding those where children were victims. They were also told to contact the parents of those children to sell policies for their other children. Tom Raskin, an experienced Globe salesman, read of a drive-by shooting at Nancy Leonard's home, in which Leonard's 5-year-old son was killed. The Los Angeles Times reported that Leonard was a single parent with four other children. Raskin traveled to Leonard's home and described the benefits of a Globe policy for her other children. He offered her the $10,000 term life policy for each of the children for a total cost of $21 per month. Leonard was in the process of making funeral arrangements for her son, and Raskin noted, "See how much it costs for a funeral."

Leonard had been given several tranquilizers the night before by a physician at the hospital's emergency room. The physician had also given her 15 more tranquilizers to help her through the following week. She had taken one additional tranquilizer an hour before Raskin arrived, using a Coors Lite beer to take the pill.Leonard signed the contract for the policy. After her son's funeral, she received the first month's bill for it and exclaimed, "I didn't buy any life insurance! Where did this come from?"

Discuss whether Leonard had legal standing to sue Globe. Did she have to pay for the life insurance? Also, discuss the ethical issues involved in the Globe's sales program. Discuss the legal issues involved in Raskin'sdecision to target Leonard the day after her son's death.

Answer 1

Yes, Leanoard obviously had legal standing to sue Globe as her consent was taken for the ocntract when she was not in complete understanding state of mind. The law seek to consider the contract under which either or all praties are under influence of some drugs which does not make them completely at mind as null and void contract.

She did not have to pay for life insurance given that she ad teaken tranquilizer with alcohol before signing the contract and was not full mind and understandinig while signing for the contract. IN fact she did not remember that she signed such any docu,ent as she exclaimed in surprise when received monthly payment bill form the company. Leonard need to prove that the sales representative knew that she was not at full consent while signing the contract from which they tool impaired advantage.

This program tries to cover those houses which are in neighborhood of the houses where shooting was taken place. This program also made sales representative to target the houses of those children who were killed. This is like taking undue advantage of ther emotion and grief.

Raiskin could have to pay legally because he deliberately targeted Leonard just after the date of death. That day she already was in grief and this grief made Raiskin put coercive influence over her, specifically after mentioning about the cost of the funeral.