Kant's Categorical Imperative Case
Yoder could have given Hooper a second chance since Hooper might have made mistakes due to his greed and ego; he might not have known the consequences of his unethical behavior. On the other hand, Hooper could have realized how serious his breaches were and stopped over using his power to mitigate the problems.
In conclusion, the salient ethical issue of the case was Hooper’s unethical behavior in business. Both parties should have elected someone else to the board of directors, to manage the corporation in the best interest of the corporation rather than self-interest. In addition, after both Hooper and Yoder paid the capital contribution to Beautiful Daydreams as shareholders, they would not have any financial liability (Mallor, et all, 2010), Hooper might not have had such pressure to act unethically and mislead the