But a federal law enforcement agency called EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) has the power to file discrimination suits against employers on behalf of alleged victims and to arbitrate claims of discrimination faced. This questions what importance and significance the employment contract holds where it’s clearly stated that all disputes are to be handled by binding arbitration. This could mean that the employer can face arbitration with the employee and litigation with EEOC that violates the original contract. Also, EEOC has the authority to decide which claim is appropriate and which claim serves public interest and I don’t agree with that 100%. In this official legal analysis paper, I would like to evaluate EEOC vs. Waffle house, which is the back bone of my paper along with my analysis and vision and EEOC’s outlook on importance of contracts with the help of their trial attorney.
John has the option of requesting compensatory and punitive damages caused by discrimination form his employer. If he does not receive the type of justice he seeks with the court’s decision, he can file appeals. If he exhausts all of his appeals, his case may lead to the Supreme Court. His case can only make it this far by following all steps set forth by the EEOC. Conclusion The EEOC provides employees with an opportunity to have an independent investigator review possible discriminatory employment practices within a private organization.
In the first situation the challenge is whether the employer should follow the contract that was agreed upon with the National Labor Relations Board or not. One point of view is that the employer should follow the contract that was agreed upon. The agreement stated that the employer was going to reinstate and pay a certain amount of back pay to each illegally discharged person. By law once a contract is made and agreed upon, both parties are liable for following through with their part of the contract. Secondly, if the employer does follow through on his part of the agreement he can be charged with breach of contract.
(pg10 ch1) The first person to apply the principals of forensic science was Edmond Locard, he began in the attic of the Lyons police department. Several years later he became the founder and director of the Institute of Criminalistic at the University of Lyons, this the quickly developed into a leading international place for forensic science. (pg11ch1) This principal is that when two object come in contact with each other there is cross contamination. He believed that when there is something carried from a crime scene the criminal can be connected to the crime. (pg 11 ch 1) The instrument that Dr. Walter C. McCrone used was the Microscope.
Does an actual agency relationship exist? "Right to Control Test" RULE: One who represents that another is his servant or other agent and thereby causes a third person justifiably to rely upon care or skill of such apparent agent is subject to liability to third person for harm caused by lack of care or skill of one appearing to be servant or other agent, as if he were such HOLDING: The court reversed the grant of summary judgment because there was enough evidence to permit a jury to find that the corporation was vicariously liable for the franchisee's alleged negligence. There was sufficient evidence to raise an issue of actual agency because the corporation had the right to
Before dealing with the Occupier’s Liability Act 1995, the law prior to this act must first be examined. This previous law dates back to 1867 to common law and the decision of Invermaur v Dames. In this case the plaintiff was present on the defendant's premises to examine a gas regulator which had been installed by the plaintiff’s superior, during the visit the plaintiff accidentally fell through a unfenced shaft in the floor. As a consequence of the fall, the plaintiff suffered injuries and sued the defendant occupier for damages for which he was successful. This case established three categories of entrance to land, and later a forth was added.
INTRODUCTION In their day to day lives and interactions, human beings commit wrongs that may cause harm to others whether intentionally or unintentionally as a result, they are made to compensate the injured party or individual who has suffered a loss or injury due to their conduct. These wrongs that human beings commit against each other on a daily basis are called torts. A tort is a private or civil wrong that is independent of a contract. This essay will with references to decided cases, critically discuss the foundation of tortious liability and the purpose of law of torts. NATURE OF A TORT The nature of a tort can best be understood by making a distinction between a tort and a crime.
However, the House of Lords decided to create a new principle of law that stated everyone has a duty of care to their neighbour, and this abled Donoghue to successfully sue the manufacturer for the damages.” In order to prove negligence and claim damages, the plaintiff has to prove a number of elements to the court. These are: * the defendant owed them a duty of care, * the defendant breached that duty of care, and * they suffered loss or damage as a direct consequence of the breach. As we saw earlier, the first element of the duty of care was created in the Donoghue case. The House of Lords stated that every person owes duty of care to their neighbour. The Lords went on to explain that ‘neighbour’ actually means ‘person so closely and directly
ROLE OF THE TRIAL JUDGE Is the Case an Appropriate One for Punitive Damages? It is the responsibility of the trial judge, in the first instance, to determine whether the case is appropriate for punitive damages, i.e. whether the question of punitive damages will be submitted to the jury.' The main focus of that determination is the nature of the defendant's conduct. The trial judge looks for evidence that the defendant acted intentionally, outrageously, recklessly or with conscious disregard for the rights of others.
VICARIOUS LIABILITY The tort doctrine that imposes responsibility upon one person for the failure of another, with whom the person has a special relationship (such as Parent and Child, Employer and Employee. Or Owner of vehicle and Driver), to exercise such care as a reasonably prudent person would use under similar circumstances. Vicarious Liability is a legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a person who did not cause the injury but who has a particular legal relationship to the person who did act negligently. It is also referred to as imputed Negligence. Legal relationships that can lead to imputed negligence include the relationship between Parent and Child, Husband and Wife, Owner of a vehicle and Driver, and Employer and Employee.