The writer is very fast, professional and responded to the review request fast also. Thank you.
Presentation/PPT
27/08/2022
Read “The IRAC method of case study analysis” found in the Week 5 Electronic Reserve Readings.
Select one legal case from the following list and discuss the case with your Learning Team.
Write a case brief using the IRAC method.
Create an 8- to 10-slide Microsoft® PowerPoint® presentation in which your team members summarize how the legal concepts in the selected case can be applied within a business managerial setting.
Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment.
Remember, both a brief and presentation are due.
Here is the case breif on;y the power point needed
Message expanded.Message readIRAC Case Briefposted by Matt , May 22, 2016, 4:18 PM
Hi Team,
Please find an IRAC case brief, below. Feel free to make revisions to any and all sections. This is intended to be a first draft and discussion starter.
Mirian – were you able to determine if we need to submit (1) a case brief and presentation or (2) just a presentation?
Thanks,
Matt
Case: STAUB v. PROCTOR HOSPITAL
Issue: Can an employer be held liable for employment discrimination based on the discriminatory animus of an employee who influenced, but did not make, the ultimate employment decision?
Rule: Judgment as a matter of law; USERRA; “Cat’s Paw” Theory of Discrimination
Analysis: Petitioner Vincent Staub was discriminated against by his boss (Mulally) and Mulally’s boss (Korenchuk). Both of Staub’s superiors were hostile against his military service and wanted to end this position with the company. Staub’s job is protected under USEERA. Mulally and Korenchuk influenced the company’s VP of HR and COO to fire Staub. The company is liable for employer discrimination. Although the VP of HR and COO did not discriminate against Staub, the basis for firing Staub was discriminatory. Mulally and Korechuck wanted Staub terminated based on discriminatory reasons and they influenced the termination decision.
“The employer is at fault because one of its agents committed an action based on discriminatory animus that was intended to cause, and did in fact cause, an adverse employment decision. . . . motivated by antimilitary animus that is intended by the supervisor to cause an adverse employment action, and if that act is a proximate cause of the ultimate employment action, then the employer is liable under USERRA” (Reed et al., 2013, p. 700).
Conclusion: The employer may be held liable for employment discrimination under USERRA because its agents intended to discriminate. The person who actually fired the employee is of no consequence.
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2011/06/jn.aspx
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_50
https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/litigation/manual/3-3-b_rule_50.cfm
Words: 299
The writer is very fast, professional and responded to the review request fast also. Thank you.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more