detroit police department approximately 15 years ago L a w
Q1: David Jones, a Rogers city police officer, worked for the appellee during his off-duty hours as a loss-prevention officer. On March 25, he supposedly observed the appellant stealing a pack of cigarettes. The appellant was apprehended and arrested and charged with shoplifting. It was later determined that the cigarettes did not come from the appellee’s store, and the shoplifting charge was nolle prossed. As a result of the incident, the appellant filed suit in federal court against David Jones, the City of Rogers, and the city’s police chief. In the same action, he sued the appellee for battery, assault, false imprisonment, defamation, malicious prosecution, and negligence. What is the result? Is David Jones an employee of the appellee? Is the police department liable for his actions?
Q2: Martin Long and Steve Jones are opening a facility to provide treatment for alcoholism. Opening a new business is a huge financial investment and money is tight. They are questioning whether they need to hire a lawyer to draft an employee manual. Based on what you have learned so far this quarter, how would use advise Martin and Steve? Be sure to explain your answer in detail with applicable examples.
Q3: Plaintiff Jonah Hughes was employed by an association to assist in the processing of insurance benefits for current and former officers of the Bayshore Police Department. In that capacity, Highes had access to files containing confidential information about the officers.
Hughes became romantically involved with a felon who was incarcerated. He planned to marry her. Highes’ supervisors, upon learning of this, concluded that he had a conflict of interest because he had an intimate relationship with an inmate and access to confidential information about law enforcement personnel. Hughes’ employer gave him the choice of ending the relationship or terminating his employment. Hughes chose the latter and then filed suit.
The issue before the court is whether the employee’s romantic involvement with a felon compromised his ability to perform her work. You are the newest member of the court. What do you think? Be sure that your analysis is based on the law. What does the law require about work performance?
Q4: Mustapha Khalin, who is Muslim, applies to the Boxville Police Department for work. He is denied employment. Ms. Khalin is qualified for the position. He possesses excellent references, having worked as a police officers for the Detroit Police Department approximately 15 years ago. He files a lawsuit alleging religious and national origin discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. He has a prima facie case. The Boxville Police Department alleges that Ms. Khalin’s membership in a right-wing fundamentalist group 20 years ago is a legitimate relation for not hiring him. Is that justified? Be sure to use legal reasoning — not just “I think that…” Your opinion is important but it must be supported by the law.
Q5: You considered in the discussion board the facts that the United States Supreme Court considered in Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 524 U.S. 129 (2004). The issue before the Court was:
When a supervisor makes a workplace environment so hostile (through sexual harassment) that an employee has no choice but to quit, may the employee bring suit even if she did not use the internal procedures established by the employer to report sexual harassment claims?
In an 8-to-1 decision written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court ruled that an employee faced with a situation in which a “reasonable person … would have felt compelled to resign” could bring suit even if she had not filed a report with the employer before resigning. Her employer, however, could use her failure to file a report, along with evidence of the safeguards it had in place to prevent harassment, in its defense. If it could prove that she had not attempted to prevent the harassment, and that the safeguards in place would have prevented it if she had, the employer would not be liable.
While the police department had a policy and procedure to deal with claims of harassment, the policy was not carefully implemented by the department. Should the police department be permitted to rely on the policy as a defense to the employee’s claim? Explain your answer in detail. As always, it should be supported by the law.
Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount