Legal Case Study On Legal Cases Essay

As Privy Council held in the case of "Wagon Mound (No 1)" that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable, the defendant should not be responsible for losses that are ‘too remote’ from the breach. It is obviously that the university could foresee that Brad have to quit his job to finish the degree and also need to pay for the fees.

In December 1998, while working at the Bally facility in Bensonhurst, Brennan received a fax requiring her [**5]  attendance at an educational meeting about sexual harassment to be held at the Sheepshead Bay facility (the "1998 Meeting" or "Meeting"). See Brennan Aff. P 8; Tr. at 12. About twenty Bally employees attended the meeting. See Tr. at 14. At the meeting, the employees were shown a video depicting incidents of sexual harassment. See Brennan Aff. P 9; Tr. at 16. Fred Infante, the Bally attorney who had investigated Brennan 's complaint earlier that year, ran the meeting. See Brennan Aff. P 9; Tr. at 15.

STATEMENT OF FACTS: Sheila White interviewed with Marvin Brown and obtained a job as a “track laborer” with Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company. Shortly after her hire date, however, she assumed forklift operator duties. This new assignment still fell under the “track laborer” position description, and White occasionally performed those duties although her primary responsibility was operating the forklift. Three months into her new job, White complained to the company that her immediate supervisor was sexually harassing her on the job. He was temporarily suspended and required to attend sexual harassment training. White was then informed that she was being reassigned to track labor duties only. White

Sexual harassment is always a legal topic in the work environment because the ramifications are so severe, but at the same time very abstract to describe what can constitute sexual harassment. This paper will take into consideration different elements of the law including Employment Law and cases tried before the U.S. Supreme Court. It will also offer suggestions for corrective action pertaining to the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Mitsubishi Motors in April of 1996 in regard to claims of widespread sexual harassment at the company’s plan in Normal, Illinois. “The lawsuit contends that as many as 700 women were subjected to groping and sexual remarks, creating a "hostile and abusive work environment" that went unchecked for years at the Mitsubishi Motor Manufacturing of America plant” (“U.S. Charges,” 1996). It is despicable that situation like this was allowed to happen and perhaps even more astonishing is the magnitude at which it took place. While most of the harassment “came from male assembly line workers or low-level managers,” high-level managers at plant knew of the offenses and allowed them to take place without consequences (“U.S. Charges,”

VA Empl. Comm’n, 1997 Va. App. LEXIS 178 (Va. Ct. App. Mar. 18, 1997). (citing Umbarger v. Virginia Empl. Comm’n, 404 S.E.2d 380, 383 (Va. Ct. App. 1990)). In Gardner v. Hercules the court found that an employee who becomes dissatisfied with their work environment must pursue every available option to alleviate or correct the environment before he or she can quit her job. Gardner v. Hercules, Inc., 1996 Va. App. LEXIS 22 (Va. Ct. App. Jan. 16, 1996). Furthermore in Smith v. S.W. Rodgers the plaintiff was sexually harassed by direct managers. Smith v. S.W. Rogers Co., 1999 Va. App. LEXIS 436 (Va. Ct. App. July 20, 1999). Plaintiff complained to other managers that were on the same level as the manager who were sexually harassing her, but not to higher management for fear of retaliation. Id. However, plaintiff finally reported it, but decided not to return to work. The court found that although her sexual assault claim was legitimate, the plaintiff had not allowed the situation to resolve prior to quitting and therefore she did not quit with good cause. Id. In order to find “good cause” the court looks for factors or circumstances which

Plaintiff, Deborah Burke, submits this memorandum in opposition to Defendant Strickland Watson Pierce, P.C.’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff’s retaliation claim should not be dismissed because she exhausted all the administrative remedies by filing a charge of discrimination with the EEOC and being terminated during the investigation. Jones v. Calvert Group, Ltd., 551 F.3d 297 (4th Cir. 2009); Clockedile v. New Hampshire Dept. of Corr., 245 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2001); Franceschi v. U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs, 514 F.3d 81 (1st Cir. 2008). Further, the conduct she suffered in the workplace was sufficiently severe to qualify as a sexually hostile environment. The Court should deny the motion.

In the case of Varner v. National Super Markets, 94 F.3d 1209 (8th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1110 (1997), Ms. Varner was severely harassed by a coworker and her fiance reported the harassment to the manger of the store (Walsh, 2013). Since it was stated in the company policy that the victim was report the harassment themselves to the human resource department, the manager did not do anything about the reports (Walsh, 2013). Sexual harassment is widespread and up to half of women in the workforce experience it at some point, but it is rare to have a formal complaint filed (Vijayasiri, 2008).

Thus, an employer violates Title VII when the workplace is filled with discriminatory sex-based intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim 's employment and create an abusive working environment. In order to establish that she has an actionable claim for sexual harassment in the workplace under Title VII, Mrs. Singleton was required to exhibit that the offensive conduct was unwelcome, was based on her sex, was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive work environment, and was imputable to her employer (Wellington-James, 2015).

The accuser had alleged that her supervisor constantly subjected her to sexual harassment both during and after business hours, on and off the employer's premises; she alleged that he forced her to have sexual intercourse with him on numerous occasions, fondled her in front of other employees, followed her into the women's restroom and exposed himself to her, and even raped her on several occasions. She alleged that she submitted for fear of jeopardizing her employment. She testified, however, that this conduct had ceased almost a year before she first complained in any way, by filing a Title VII suit, her EEOC charge was filed later (see infra at n.34). The supervisor and the employer denied all of her allegations and claimed they were fabricated in response to a work dispute.

Work place policies regarding sexual harassment is the main issue discussed in this article. Sexual harassment has continued to be a challenge within the workplace. According to a recent review of sexual harassment related resolutions, employers have paid over $732,976.00 in sexual harassment fines (Hobson, Szostek, & Fitzgerald, 2015). The EEOC has issued written guidelines for appropriate strategies employers should use to handle workplace sexual harassment and specific ways to address it. It is the employer’s duty to proactively work to protect all employees from any type of sexual harassment by following sexual harassment policies and procedures that are put in place. Failure to implement and follow the policy and procedure in the workplace can and most likely will lead to liability should an EEOC investigation or lawsuit occur. The employer needs to disperse copies of the policies and procedures and post them in central locations throughout the organization and address sexual harassment in the employee handbooks. The policy and procedures need to clear

The law covering the retaliation issue on the sexual harassment case would be “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, and religion. It generally applies to employers with 15 or more employees, including federal, state, and local governments” (http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm)

For a timeline and a narrative of the cases that set legal precedence in the areas of retaliation and sexual harassment would consist of Williams v. Saxbe in 1976. The court recognized sexual harassment as a form of sexual discrimination when sexual advances by male superior towards female employee. In the Barnes v. Costle case in 1977, it set the precedent that if a female employee was retaliated against for rejecting sexual advances of her boss, it is a violation of Title VIIs prohibition against sex discrimination. The court of US Court of Appeals, Second District ruled in this matter. In the Bundy v. Jackson case in 1981, it set the precedent that if an employee is sexually insulted, there can be Title VII liability. This was ruled by

Some women may even prefer not to report any allegations of being pressured sexually for fear of what might happen to them if they do. Although it is not lawful to retaliate against an individual for exposing employment practices that discriminate many people would seek retaliatory efforts. Therefore there are many women who feel it may be better for them to suffer in silence than to deal with revengeful or vindictive tactics such as being denied promotions or being scorned by other women who may think that the victim is pressing charges for attention. Because of the nature of such unprofessional behavior the victim may find him or herself very alone and no one wants to go through that especially after suffering through the harassment itself.

This writer will be discussing a case where a male employee files a sexual harassment claim against the employer as the male employee identifies as being gay. He also is filing discrimination on the basis of his gender and alleges retaliation as he was terminated after he had complained about his female coworker. Apparently, the male employee alleged that a female employee while at a dinner and concert after work hours grabbed his privates. It is important to note that the male employee’s performance prior to the incident was declining and was counseled on several occasions by his employer about his declining production. Furthermore, this writer will be discussing whether if the facts could result in liability to the employer for sexual harassment or gender discrimination. Also, this writer will be integrating and referring to various sources and cases that