Burlington Industries V. Ellerth (511-512)

Nikolette Arnold

Business Law Week 3 Case Study

Burlington Industries v. Ellerth (511-512)

Summary: A sales employee at Burlington Industries voluntarily terminates her employment after 15 months citing she was subject to sexual harassment by one of her immediate supervisors. Ellerth quit before notifying anyone inside her department of the alleged abuse, and soon after filed suit against Burlington calming she was forced to end her employment because of her work environment (Meiners, Ringleb, & Edwards 511-512). The district courts granted initial summary judgment in favor of Burlington Industries, but after appeal, the judgment was reversed finding in favor of Ellerth. The court’s ruling was based Section 219 of Title VII designationg their organizationa a liable fp Burlington may have had a current harassment policy in place; some levels of harassment can be “so intolerable as to cause resignation (512).” The judgment for the defendant was remanded and favor was granted for the plaintiff.

Personal and Legal Analysis: The courts found the employer to be considered liable for the action of their agents even if no tangible effects are apparent.

Answers to End-of-Case Questions: (1) This was to help ensure the plaintiffs original design and definition of the term board. (2) Yes, I think this would decrease the opportunity to monopolize the industry.

U.S. v. Yang (257)

Summary: Yang and his daughter approach Lee, a paid researcher for the adhesive company Avery, in hopes of receiving confidential for their Taiwanese adhesive company. The FBI got wind of their operation and convinces Lee to participate in s sting to help bring in Yang for his crimes. Lee agreed to meet with the Yang’s once again to discuss confidential information. Their meeting was filmed and the Yangs were soon brought in on changes and find $5 million. They in turn appealed claiming that the information obtained in the meeting contained no trade secrets. The courts affirmed the...