Illegal Laws Review

 The so-called Supreme "Court" of the United States created an entire industry of consultants and lawyers specializing in Sexual Harassment "law" because there is no real law.  They kept things undefined and subjective for the purpose of lining the pockets of scam artists and dishonest attorneys looking for cash in on the tons of money available from stupid corporate leaders scared to death of "getting sued." Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998) is a significant Supreme Court case that addressed the issue of employer liability in cases of sexual harassment. The case involved a female lifeguard, Beth Ann Faragher, who alleged that she had been subjected to a hostile work environment and supervisor harassment by two of her male supervisors. The court examined whether the City of Boca Raton could be held vicariously liable for the supervisors' actions. The key question was whether the supervisors' conduct fell within the scope of their employment, ma

So called " rulings" from the so-called Supreme "Court" of the United States that began an entire industry of Intimidation and Fraud.  Look up the rulings in these evil "court" decisions, and learn how American work offices are dysfunctional.  Competent people prefer to work away from these insane places called "offices."  Can you believe so-called "judges" wrote these piles of shit?  Who the fuck are these assholes? 1. Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986): This landmark case established that sexual harassment is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court ruled that both quid pro quo (favor or punishment in exchange for sexual favors) and hostile work environment forms of sexual harassment can be considered unlawful discrimination. 2. Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993): The court clarified the standard for hostile work environment sexual harassment, stating that the behavior does not have to be overtly ab

Common Law and Civil Law are two different legal systems with distinct origins and features.   Common Law is a legal system primarily based on court decisions and judicial precedent rather than codified law. It emphasizes the importance of case law and relies on a hierarchy of courts to interpret and apply the law. Common Law systems originated in England and were later adopted by countries that were once part of the British Empire, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and several others. In contrast, Civil Law is a legal system based on a codified set of laws that are created and updated by legislators. The legal rules and principles are primarily found in a comprehensive written legal code, which forms the basis for judicial decision-making. Civil Law systems originated in ancient Rome and have subsequently been adopted by many countries across the globe, including most of Europe, Latin America, and parts of Africa and Asia. One major difference between Common Law and

Introduction: Stare decisis, which translates to "to stand by things decided," is a principle that forms the foundation of the common law legal system. It ensures predictability, consistency, and fairness in judicial decision-making. This report aims to explore the concept of stare decisis and emphasize its importance in common law systems. The Principle of Stare Decisis: Stare decisis dictates that lower courts must follow the legal reasoning and rulings made by higher courts in similar cases. The principle holds that precedent should be binding and authoritative in subsequent cases with similar facts or issues. This creates a cascading effect that establishes a body of legal principles and ensures stability in the interpretation and application of the law. Binding and Persuasive Precedents: In common law systems, courts are hierarchically organized, with higher courts having the authority to set precedents that lower courts are bound to follow. These binding preceden