preview

Lisa Anne Jarner Case Summary

analytical Essay
777 words
777 words
bookmark

In the case of Lisa Anne Varner versus National Super Market Inc. , I find in favor of the Plaintiff, Ms. Varner. The burden of proof is upon Ms. Varner to show evidence, and prove that National Super Market Inc. (NSMI), allowed the conduct, and behavior of Robert Edmiston (employee of NSMI) intimidate and isolate Ms. Varner. Ms. Varner being a part of the protected class characteristic, which violates the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, NSMI allowed Mr. Edmiston’ conduct, and behavior to drastically alter Ms. Varner’s working conditions that created such a stressful environment that Ms. Varner could no longer function properly on the job nor thrive/survive within it. The burden of proof is upon Ms. Varner to provide evidence, and …show more content…

In this essay, the author

  • Opines that lisa anne varner vs. national super market inc. is in favor of the plaintiff. the burden of proof is on ms's to prove that nsmi allowed the conduct and behavior of robert edmiston to drastically alter her working conditions.
  • Argues that nsmi's refusal to report and/or act upon the reports of workplace incident allowed mr. edmiston the opportunity to further assault ms. varner without recourse.
  • Argues that the court believes that ms. varner reported the first incident of mr. edmiston's misconduct to an official of nsmi in july or august of 1991.
  • Explains that the court recognizes the second attack on ms. varner in november 22, 1991.
  • Narrates how ms. varner reported the attack to ities the next morning, and proceeded in a conversation with mr. edmiston about both assaults, which led to nsmi arrest.
  • Explains that the court recognizes that ms. varner continued to work for nsmi after the report, and arrest of mr. edmiston. she sought psychological help and was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress syndrome.
  • Concludes that ms. varner has presented evidence and shown adequate proof of national super markets inc. via the inability their official to provide a safe workplace for an employee.
  • Explains that plaintiff-ms. varner suffered harassment from mr. edmiston due to his conduct and/or behavior upon her person, and with no formal recourse from the company, she suffered from a hostile work environment that allowed the assaults to continue
  • Narrates how ms. varner sought help through ities to give her the relief she petitioned for several times with nsmi’s official. she admitted to both assaults, and was properly arrested.
  • Explains that nsmi is liable for ms. varner's well-being and will be fined punitive damages according to her inability and refusal to act.

Varner continued to work for NSMI after the report, and arrest of Mr. Edmiston. While doing so, Ms. Varner would emotion status was affected, and damaged. Moreover, Ms. Varner sought out psychological help, and was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress syndrome. Furthermore, the refusal, and reject by the NSMI official to protect Ms. Varner within the workplace provided for the continuously of the assaults which now pledges Ms. Varner. It is the finding of this court, that Ms. Varner has presented evidence, and shown adequate proof of National Super Markets Inc. via the inability their official to provide a safe workplace for an employee. The inability, and refusal to report the several incidents of attacks to upper management due to the fact that Ms. Varner spoke through her finance and not formally to him, is a mute case. Moreover, after the NSMI’s response upon being made aware showed and gave proof that Ms. Varner’s reporting the incident to the official would have received the same reaction. The plaintiff-Ms. Varner has proven that she suffer from harassment from Mr. Edmiston due to his conduct and/or behavior upon her person, and with no formal recourse from the company, Ms. Varner suffered from a hostile work environment that allowed the assaults to

Get Access