What was the result in Patterson v. Dominos' Pizza, LLC, the case in the text addressing whether a franchisor can be held vicariously liable by a franchisee's employee for sexual harassment, retaliation, and tort claims?
A) The franchisor failed to remedy sexual harassment by the franchisee, and thus was vicariously liable.
B) The franchisor was not vicariously liable for sexual harassment by the franchisee because it was not the plaintiff's employer.
C) The franchisor was vicariously liable for sexual harassment by the franchisee because it was the plaintiff's employer.
D) The franchise agreement governed whether or not the franchisor was vicariously liable for sexual harassment by the franchisee.
E) The case was remanded to the trial court to determine whether the franchisor stands in an employment or agency position in relation to the franchisee and its employees, in order to determine if the plaintiff-employee can pursue her claims against the franchisor.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q26: [Car Repair] Gordon and Leo are partners
Q27: Which of the following statements is false
Q28: Which of the following is a partnership
Q29: [Car Repair] Gordon and Leo are partners
Q30: [Car Repair] Gordon and Leo are partners
Q32: Assuming all other requirements are met, which
Q33: [Car Repair] Gordon and Leo are partners
Q34: Which statement is true regarding S corporations?
A)
Q35: When a group decides to organize for
Q36: Which statement is true regarding corporations?
A) A
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents