Week 7 Case Study Paper – Barbano v. Madison County

Answer the following questions based on this week’s reading.

Barbano v. Madison County
- Madison County contended that Barbano needed to provide “direct evidence” of discrimination that had played a motivating or substantial part in the decision. What would such evidence look like? Is it likely that most plaintiffs who are discriminated against because of their gender would be able to get “direct evidence” that gender was a motivating or substantial factor?
- The “clearly erroneous” standard is applied here, as it is in many cases where appellate courts review trial court determinations. State the test, and explain why the appellate court believed that the trial judge’s ruling was not “clearly erroneous.”
Duncan v. General Motors Corporation
- Which opinion is more persuasive to you—the majority opinion or the dissenting opinion? Why?
- Should the majority on the appeals court substitute its judgment for that of the jury? Why?

Instructions:

400 words of unique analysis using properly placed headings and/or bullet points to organize the paper
Submit as a word document.
Use APA Style citation.
Consider the CRA method (see # 7) when completing this assignment.
Due Tuesday, 11:59 PM EST.

Solution

We are working on a solution. To place your order for an original paper send us an email now.