-prohibits discrimination by public employer 

-constitutional equal protection is for gov. action

-sets up system (EEOC)

-equal employment opportunity commission

-fed. agency to enforce statutes/carry out statutes

-5 people

-also state and local EEO

race, color, national origin, sex, and religion

-you can't discriminate against these in employment

-federal

1. evaluate claim-reasonable cause?

2. attempt process to bring parties together for conciliation

3. Litigate claim themselves (only when pervasive) and it doesnt happen often

4. Right-to-sue letter (period of time which you have to bring claim)

-Disparate treatment

-Disparate impact 

-intentionally discriminating 

-ex: sign says "no Irish need aply"

-facial policy or other evidence 

-Defense is BFOQ-bona fide occupational qualifications (national race or color)

-damages are better (more $)

-adverse impact

-often facially neutral

-ex: >5'2 +>105 lbs

-lack of intention not a defense 

must be job-related, and consistant with business  neccesity for it to be ok

-recify past discrim./imbalance

-temporary

-flexible

-qualified

-respect minorities 

-"reasonable accomidation"

-right of persons w/ disabilities to enjoy equal employment opportunities 

-state and local

-1963

-prohibits employers from paying employees of one gender a lower wage rate than the rate paid employees of the other gender for equal work, or substantially equal work, in the same establishment 

-genetic information

-can't legally find out this info

-civil wrong that interfers with one's property or person

-civil wrong, private suit 

-plantiff, civil trial, liable-pay make right what you did wrong, medical bills, suffering, punitive/plantiff (not common)

federal funded sports must be gender equal

-civil wrong that results from intentional conduct

-must show intent 

-Assault

-battery

-defenses (consent, self defense)

-creating apprehension of a harmful or physical touching (assault) 

-mental distress/anguish 

-intentional detention of a person without that person's consent

-called shopkeeper's tort when shoplifters are unlawfully detained

-trespass (to land or personal property)

   -conversion 

-tort that produces mental anguish caused by conduct that exceeds all bounds of decency 

-"outrageous", "severe" harm 

-tort of intentional intrusion into the private affairs of another

-untrue statement by one party about another to a third party

-defenses:

   -truth

   -priviledge 

-if public figure, actually "malice"

-first element of negligence

-general duty of care imposed to act as a reasonably prudent person would in similar circumstances

-professionals have duty to perform their jobs at the level of a reasonable professional

  -malpractice

-those who own real property have a duty of care to keep their property in a condition that doesn't create hazards

-second element of negligence

-the breach of duty imposed by statute or by the application of the reaosonable person standard

-defendants conduct is evaluated against what a reasonable person would have done under the circumstances

-good samaritin laws 

-third element of negligence 

-element that connects the duty and the breach of duty to the injuries to the plaintiff

-once cause in fact is established, plaintiff must establish proximate cause

-

-must establish that the harm suffered by the injured person was a forseeable consequence of the defendant's negligent actions

-forseasbility requires only the general danger to be forseable 

-plaintiff in a personal injury negligence lawsuit must establish the actual losses caused by the defendants breach of duty of care and is entitled to be made whole for all losses

-successful plaintiff is entitled to compensation for

   1.past and future pain and suffering

   2.past and future physical impairment

   3. past and future medical care

   4. past and future loss of earning capacity 

-life and work expectancy are critical factors to consider in assessing damage involving permanent disabilities with loss of earning capacity 

1. contributory negligence

2. comparative negligence

3. assumption of the risk

4. immunity

-both the plaintiff and the defendant are negligent

-a defense that permits a negligent plaintiff to recover some damages but only in proportion to the defendant's degree of fault

-%

1. express assumption of the risk

2. implied primary assumption of the risk

-involves a written exculpatory agreement under which a plaintiff acknowledges the risks involved in certain activities and releases the defendant from prospective liability for personal injuries sustained as a result of the defendants negligent conduct

-ex: ski lift tickets, white water rafting contracts,etc.

-arises when a plaintiff has impliedly consented, often in advance of any negligence by the defendant, to relieve a defendant of a duty to the plaintiff regarding specific known and appreciated risks

-subjective standard, one specific to the plaintiff regarding specific known and appreciated risks

-developed to provide guaranteed protection for those who are injured by conduct the law deems both serious and inexcusable

-an absolute standard of liability imposed by the law in circumstances the courts or legislatures have determined require a high degree of protection

-when imposed, the company or person who has caused injury or damages by the conduct will be required to compensate for those damages in an absolute sense 

-most common are situations in which a statutory duty is imposed and in product liability

-felony/misdemeanor

-mental state-intent/gross negligence

-corporate liability officers (SOX)

-doesn't require an awareness or knowledge of guilt

-the voluntary commission of the act is sufficient for proving mental state 

-intent/gross negligence 

-corporations are help responsible for the acts of their employees and for crimes based on the failure of its employees to act

-main difference between nonbusiness and business crimes is that more people in a company can be convicted for the same business crime

-nonbusiness crimes:only those who are actually involved in the act itself can be convicted of the crime

-business crimes: managers of firms whose employees commit crimial acts can be held liable if the managers authorized the conduct of the employees or knew about it and did nothing or failed to act reasonably in their position

-federal reforms passed as a result of the collapses of companies such as Enron;provides for longer sentances and higher fines for both executives and companies 

-part of SOX

-MLCA

-Patriot act

-amendments make small business subject to the requirements of disclosure under MLCA and BSA (bank secrecy act)

-now also money market accounts are covered

-prohibits the knowing and willful participation in a financial transaction involving unlawful proceeds when the transaction is designed to conceal or disguise the source of the funds

-used to control bribery, tax evasion, and money laundering 

-expands coverage of the law from banks and financial institutions to anyone involved in financial transactions(securities brokers, travel agents, insurance companies, etc.)

-RICO

-

-federal law, initially targeting organized crime, that has expanded in scope and provides penalties, and civil recovery for multiple criminal offenses, or a pattern of racketeering 

-part of The Organized Crime Control Act

-designed to prevent individuals involved in organized crime from investing money obtaine through racketeering in legitimate businesses

-RICO authorizes criminal and civil actions against persons who use any income derived from racketeering activity to invest in, control, or conduct and enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity 

-Under RICO, a pattern of racketeering activity must be established by proving that at least two acts of racketering activity (predicate acts) have been comitted within 10 years

-conviction under RICO can result in $25,000 fine and up to 20 years imprisonment as well as loss of the property involved 

-civil RICO actions have been successful against business entities

-private RICO actions no longer involve securities fraud because it was eliminated as a predicate act, when absent a prior criminal conviction

the act of giving money, property, or any benefit to a particular person to infulence that person's judgment in favor of the giver

-at federal and state levels, it is a crime for one who holds public office to hold a financial interest in or to recieve money money from an enterprise that seeks to do business with the government

-public officals must file annual disclosure forms about their financial positions as well as provide a disclosure of all gifts and their value 

-FCPA prohibits making, authorizing, or promising payments or gifts of money or anything of value with the intent to corrupt

-doesn't prohibit grease or facilitation payments 

-illegal demand by a public officer acting with apparent authority

-expanded in some states to include obtaining anything of value by threat or to making terrorist threats 

-conspiracy

-money laundering

-rocketeering

-bribery/corrupt influence 

-extortion/blackmail

-forgery

-perjury

-false claims/pretenses 

-bad checks

-embezzlement

-securities fraud

-mail+wire fraud

-credit card fraud

-obstruction of justice 

-almost all states have statutes that forbid obtaining money or goods under false pretenses 

-ex:delivering a check knowing that there is insufficient money in the bank account to cover the check 

-in abscence of a bad check statute, the use of bad check would be prosecuted under a false pretense statute

-it is a crime to use or pass a check with the intent to defraud with the knowledge that there are insufficient funds in the bank to pay the check when it is represented for payment 

-crime to steal a credit card, possing without consent, and using a credit card without consent (fraud) is a crime in some states

-using a cancelled card is a crime of false pretenses

-when someone signs the name of the card holder they commit forgery 

-a provision of SOX

-it is a felony for anyone, including company employees, auditors, attorneys, and consultants to alter, destroy, mutilate, conceal, cover up, falsify, or make entry with the "intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within jurisdiction of any department or agency of the U.S."