The Case Of Compuserve Inc. V. Patterson

Pam took an indefinite leave of absence from her job, sublet her apartment in State A, and

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) holds the responsibility of enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee based on a person’s race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity and sexual orientation, national origin, age (40 or older), disability and/or genetic information (U.S. EEOC, 2016a). The EEOC laws cover most employers with at least fifteen employees as well as labor unions and employment agencies (U.S. EEOC, 2016a). The EEOC has the ability to investigate charges of alleged discrimination against employees who are employed by organizations covered by the EEOC. The EEOC not only uses these investigations to protect alleged victims, they also use them as an education tool for organizations. The EEOC conducted an investigation based on racial discrimination in the EEOC v. Alliant Techsystems case, which was settled in 2012 when they paid the alleged victim in relief expenses.

In 1974, the Southeastern promotions, Ltd. V. Conrad case came to the Supreme Court. This came to the court because they believed it violated the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects freedom of religion, speech, press, petition and assembly. In Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. V. Conrad it was argued that Southeastern Promotions was stripped of their freedom of speech because they were denied the use of the Tivoli Theater in Chattanooga, Tennessee to put on the rock musical Hair. The Supreme Court had to uphold the First Amendment while still allowing the theater to keep their reputation of being a family establishment.

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, lawful case in which, on March 9, 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court governed consistently (9–0) that, for a slander suit to be effective, the complainant must demonstrate that the guilty proclamation was made with " 'genuine perniciousness', with learning that it was false or with neglectful failure of whether it was the truth or not." Specifically, the case included a notice that showed up in The New York Times in March 1960 that sketched out how African Americans had been persecuted and that requested that perusers contribute cash to the battle to end racial isolation in the South.

Jan Hughes, Plaintiff-Appellant v, Boston Scientific corporation, Defendant-Apellee., 631F .3d 762 (2011), United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (January 21, 2011)

631F .3d 762 (2011), United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (January 21, 2011) .

The parties in this lawsuit are: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) (plaintiff) and Mims Distributing Company, Inc (defendant), the EEOC is the plaintiff on behalf of Christopher Alston (Lally, 2015). Christopher Alston was a potential employee of the Mims Distributing Company, Inc.

Facts: This is a Title VII action alleging harassment based on national origin and religion. The facts are set forth in the light most favorable to Rafiq. On May 11, 2001, Mohommed Rafiq was hired as a car salesman. Rafiq was born in India and is a practicing Muslim. The alleged harassment began on September 11, 2001. When he arrived for work that afternoon, his co-workers were watching news coverage of the terrorist attacks and one of them asked him in a mocking way, "Where have you been?", as if to infer that he had participated in the attacks.

can usefuly be shared. Give examples of their sharing as it ocurs in practice in distributed

The facts of this issues is that there has been in some cases of hairstyle based discrimination within the work place. Looking at the case of EEOC v. Mims Distributing Company, Inc., in regards to Christopher Alston, an African American man. This case was a hairstyle based discrimination, however it was based on the company not having a policy to addressed hairstyle as a religious practice. The outcome of this case ended with Mims Distributing Company paying $50,000 and adopting a formal religious accommodation policy that will address future issues (Lally, 2015). Another case based on hairstyle discrimination would be Farryn Johnson v. Hooters. Ms. Johnson, an African American was awarded more than $250,000 after an arbitrator found that racial discrimination did in fact contributed to her getting fired (CHUCK, 2015). Hooters prohibits only African-American Hooters Girls from wearing blond highlights in their hair, other women were allowed to wear blond highlight in their hair (CHUCK, 2015). Johnson was told by the manager that blond streaks didn 't look natural on African Americans (CHUCK, 2015). However, on the other hand cases that are similar to Chasity Jones, an African American woman, who was initially hired to work for Catastrophe Management Systems but notified later that the job was withdrawn because of her hairstyle, which were dreadlocks, was not found guilty of discrimination (Wellington, 2016). However, every case is not like the other case because

CCIB received a call from DCFS. They received a call from a member of the staff of LA County Board of Supervisors (Ofuna). Elizabeth reported that FFA SW Claudia Cuevas was driving her personal vehicle (with no foster children in it) when she was involved in a vehicle accident. The other driver was a Miss Cummins, was concerned and convinced Ms. Cuevas to take cash for the damage repair. MS. Cuevas accepted $450 in cash (in two payments.) Miss Cummins is apparently under the age of 18 and her mother, Nobie Cummins became aware of the situation and confronted Ms. Cuevas at the FFA. (Karen cash, director of the FFA was present). Nobie Cummins accused Ms. Cuevas of intimidation and manipulation of her daughter. (Daughter was called and on speaker

Lawrence Bittaker took the lawsuit to court because the prison guards took down the 250 loose pictures that were pinned up in his cell had violated is rights of having equal protection as other inmates. Bittaker claims that the officers had violated his first amendment rights. When the lawsuit finally reached the courtroom and the officers stated that the pictures that Mr.Bittaker had hanging were a fire hazard in his cell which they seized the pictures for security reasons.They also claim he had about 600 pieces of loose-leaf paper just stack in a pile inside his cell which was in the plaintiffs' actions to use that paper but inside it was just in a pile.The plaintiff had claimed that the officer took all the loose paper except for the ones

Per the FMLA, the employee is ordinarily entitled to return to the same shift or equivalent work schedule. In Hunt v. Rapids, the employee contended that the full-time nurse night shift position was not equivalent to the day shift position. The Medical Center contended that the positions were equivalent because the compensation and duties were the same. Hunt v. Rapids Healthcare Sys, 277 F.3d 762 (5th Cir. La. 2001). However, the court of appeals reversed the summary judgment in favor of the employer because it violated her substantive rights under the FMLA by failing to restore her to her previous or equivalent position when she returned from her leave. Id. at 772.

The discovery of unethical billing alongside unethical accounting practices provoked a chain reaction towards a hospital accountant by the name of Rehberg. An accountant trying to serve justice was entangled in a web of lies. Rehberg vs. Paulk is a very interesting Supreme Court case. Rehberg vs. Paulk embodied much of the injustice that is not presented to the public when sworn officials break the very laws that are supposed to be protected. The Rehberg vs. Paulk case provides controversy among different jurisdictions within the judicial system and gives examples of the different elements of crime within the case.

Compaq Computer Corporation was a company founded in 1982 that developed, sold, and supported computers and related products and services. Compaq produced some of the first IBM PC compatible computers, and were the first company to legally reverse engineer the IBM Personal Computer. They possessed a large marketplace and were a severe competitor for the technical giant Hewlett Packard. Both of these organization were at a crossroads with regards to their financial futures and they were competing against the other for market penetration of the personal computer.