This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Your employee, Tom Smith, believes women are treated as inferiors in the department where he works. He has complained to his supervisor, Doug Greer, who is also your employee, and to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Greer has responded by reducing Smith's salary and opportunities for overtime. Does Smith have a case against your company? If so, describe his cause of action and what he must prove to recover. (150 to 200-words). As the agent of the company supervisor would be guilty of retaliation and the company will be liable for the action of supervisor under the doctrine respondeat superior" which states that principle is liable for the acts of his agent. Employer had taken an adverse action by reducing the salary and opportunities to overtime but on the same hand smith had to prove that he has only exercised his protected right and the punitive action taken by the employer is because of it. Smith had to prove that the action taken against him is because of the complaint he had made to the employer and supervisor about the alleged discrimination and he had to prove that the action taken against him is not a part of disciplinary action. And he can do so by the evidence of his reduced salary and the opportunities of overtime that he was exercising before he made complain. Hazel is 84, and suffers from debilitating arthritis. Sometimes, she can barely walk. Every time Hazel has been unable to get around, her neighbor Ruth cooks and cleans for her until she feels better. Hazel has offered to pay Ruth, but Ruth always declines. One day when Hazel is feeling well, she and Ruth eat out in a restaurant, and Hazel tells Ruth she is going to leave her $50,000 in her will. Six months later, Hazel dies without leaving a will. Can Ruth successfully sue Hazels estate for $50,000? State the legal reasons for your answer. (150 to 200-words). However there are some states that recognize the orally made principle only in some condition when the death is about to happen and there are witnesses present when the promise is made. Other part of the case is that as Ruth was rendering services to her neighbor and for her services Hazel offered her to pay but the offer was repeatedly turn down. So if Ruth claims that there was a contract she could not succeed in her claim as Hazel did not receive any consideration for$50,000 since there was an offer and acceptance though but no consideration as consideration is one of the basic and important part of any contract....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 08/22/2011 for the course ACCOUNTING 201 taught by Professor Stevejoseph during the Winter '11 term at Aarhus Universitet.
- Winter '11