Eddy worked with a glass manufacturing company and he was laid off from the firm due to his age. He filed suit under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. After his removal, the employer provided evidence that proved Eddy had accessed and copied confidential documents prior to his discharge, and that the tampering of documents could preclude the right of the plaintiff to sue under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The court would most likely state that:
A) after acquired documents have no significance in this kind of case.
B) the employer violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the plaintiff is not guilty of tampering with documents.
C) the case was in favor of the employer and precluded the rights of plaintiff to sue against employer.
D) the after-acquired evidence does not preclude the plaintiff's suit but rather goes to the issue of what remedies are available.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q36: When the plaintiff has established a prima
Q37: Fifty-nine year old Linda has worked at
Q38: Fifty-two year old Nicolas worked as an
Q39: Fifty-five year old Mark has worked with
Q40: If the waivers are part of a
Q42: The Age Discrimination in Employment Act provides
Q43: How is the Age Discrimination in Employment
Q44: What are the provisions of the Age
Q45: In Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp the
Q46: Carl had worked as a ground staff
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