Business law: Sexual harassment affects both men and women

Essay Instructions:

Case Analysis Memo Worth 10% of final grade Write an extensive, comprehensive analysis of a court case related to an area of business law covered in BMGT 380. The analysis will include reading a court case opinion, writing a case brief, researching related materials and analyzing the case and its implications. The case is attached to this conference. The case analysis must be 4-5 pages in length (excluding title page, Bibliography, tables, appendices). The 4-5 page length is a maximum. Case Analysis Content Format: The case analysis must include the following content: Introduction: 1-2 paragraph introduction of the case analysis. Case Background: Discussion of background of case, including discussion of previously decided related cases using the actual court opinions of other legal cases, law review journal articles, and other legal publication articles as resources. Analysis of Current Implications of Case: Discussion of how case decision is likely to affect current events and business law, using the actual court opinions of other legal cases, law review journal articles and legal publications as resources. Analysis of Future Implications of Case: Discussion of how case decision is likely to affect/influence future business law and future court cases, using actual court opinions of other legal cases, law review journal articles and legal publications as resources. This is not to be your personal opinion. Personal Opinion of Case: 1-5 paragraph discussion or your personal opinion of the case. Your opinions must be largely supported with legal rationale and legal principles, legal resources and other cases; it may not be only an emotional reaction. Summary/Conclusion of Case: Discussion of summary, conclusions of case, excluding your personal opinion. Bibliography: Properly formatted bibliography of at least 5 resources used in case analysis, in addition to the case citation. In other words, you are required to use a minimum of 5 legal resources + the case resource for a total of 6+ resources which must be cited in the Bibliography and body of the analysis. Case Analysis Evaluation Criteria: The case analysis will be evaluated according to the following standards: - An accurate and complete case brief; - Logical integration of information to support the case analysis discussion; - Comprehensiveness/depth of research and analysis; - Comprehensive, thorough analysis of case; - Organizational consistency, orderly flow, relevancy, and effectiveness of sequential ideas and paragraphs to the case analysis; - Clarity of expression and presentation of ideas; - Grammatically correct construction and correct spelling and punctuation; - Timely submission of analysis on the designated due date; - Caliber, quality, and depth of research, judged in part according to the nature of the case subject matter and the bibliographic documentation including, particularly, the use of articles from the Index to Legal Periodicals and its equivalents; - Overall quality of resources used; - Adherence to the standards of formatting and documentation, including proper in-text citations and references using only APA (American Psychological Association) documentation style, or Kate Turabian documentation style (as assigned by instructor); - Proper court case citation format; Accuracy and comprehensiveness of citations; - Use of required minimum quantity of resources; - Conformance with presentation format requirements; - Overall quality of research and analysis. Case Analysis Format: The paper must conform to the following presentation format: - Typed; - Double spaced, in 12-point Times New Roman or Arial fonts; - Margins not to exceed 1” in width at top/bottom/left and right margins; - Cover page to include paper title, your name, class title/section number, date; - Pagination on each page, beginning with the first page of text; - APA in-text citation style, or Kate Turabian documentation style (as assigned); - Bibliography of sources used/cited in analysis.

Essay Sample Content Preview:

BUSINESS LAW
Name
Institution
Sexual harassment affects both men and women. It can happen anywhere, including employment institutions, education institutions, among family, friends and strangers (Laws, 2009). Any physical, verbal or non-verbal advance can be put in the category. Cases of sexual harassment bother the victim tremendously and mostly happen on a continuous basis. People often provoke people intentionally, act idiotically or joke too much. These harassers either are attracted to the individuals they interact with or are discussed by the individuals they interact with. The harassers have no right to act or comment upon the life of another person. This acts and comments give the victim a feeling of being exposed before the harasser and other people around them (Laws, 2009). The aim of this paper is to analyze a case on sexual harassment that was filed by Dianne Gober and some other plaintiffs against Ralphs Grocery Company.
In August 1995, Dianne Gober, Terrill Finton, Sarah Lang, Tina Swann, Suzanne Papiro and Talma Noland were employees at a grocery store operated by Ralphs Company in Escondido where Roger Misiolek was the store director (Court of Appeal, 2009). As the director of the store, Misiolek used to touch people inappropriately, make inappropriate comment on the sex lives of some of the plaintiffs, used profanity and three a variety of objects at a number of the plaintiffs. These plaintiffs file a suit against Ralphs and Misiolek. After they had settled with Misiolek, the court split the case against Ralphs and after the liability phase, it was found by the jury that Ralphs did not take logical steps to stop Misiolek`s harassment based on gender. The following compensatory damages were awarded to the plaintiffs $62,500 to Finton, $50,000 was given to Noland; $ 62,500 was given to Lang, $ 100,000 to Swann, $ 200,000 to Gober and $ 75,000 to Papiro. It was also determined that the harasser was a manager of Ralphs and the company had either ratified the misconduct of Misiolek or had knowledge of his bad habits and employed him with disregard of the safety and rights of others (Court of Appeal, 2009).
In the second phase of this case, on the punitive damages amount, the plaintiffs received 3,300,000 dollars in punitive damages. On retrial, another jury awarded the plaintiff five million in punitive damages. This led Ralph to file for a new trial that the amount paid for punitive damages was excessive. The court denied this motion, but changed the judgement and conditionally gave a new trial to any complainant who did not agree to an award equivalent to 15 times her damage recovery. Swann and Gober accepted it but Finton, Papiro, Lang and Noland did not. Therefore, the case here became about whether the amount of money awarded to these sexual harassment victims was excessive or not (Court of Appeal, 2009).
The court denied the petition of the Finton plaintiffs but granted the petition by Ralph and transferred the matter for reconsideration like the case of Simon v. San Paulo Holding Co. According to opinions, Ralphs can challenge the propriety of the constitution on the amount awarded for punitive damages. This decision renders debatable the appeal by the Finton plaintiffs. Ralph appealed the order of the court refusing its JNOV request setting these punitive damages at the maximum set by the constitution. The company argues that they the court should not force them to go through another retrial on this issue of punitive damages that may again end up in a result that is not acceptable by the constitution. Ralphs emphasizes that the maximum of the constitution cannot be over thrice the compensatory awards for damages of the Finton plaintiffs, but states that the company is willing to relinquish its right to getting a new trial and agree to a decision awarding punitive damages ...

Updated on January 26, 2024

Get the Whole Paper!

Not exactly what you need?

Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Order