Reference no: EM133373805

Assignment: Seeking to replace his three terminated employees, Belding ran an ad that read "Young, energetic, nurturing teachers and staff wanted. Bayside is seeking diversity in its staff. Women, ethnic minorities, and recent college graduates highly preferred as new hires. Generous salary and benefits."

Two candidates applied for teaching positions: Amanda and Colin.

Belding called Amanda's former employer to screen her qualifications. Dirk, Amanda's former supervisor provided the following comments: 1) "That would be a good job for her. She is very child-like": 2) While her performance was adequate, I would watch her around valuables - she has a sticky fingers, if you know what I mean." Amanda repeatedly turned down Dirk's sexual advances and quit the job because of Dirk. Amanda's performance was actually excellent and she never stole any property. The comments were motivated by Dirk's desire for vengeance.

Colin asked Belding not to contact his last employer, explaining that he had officially lost the job as a disciplinary measure for theft and sleeping not he job, but that he was innocent of the misconduct. Colin said that his employer trumped up the false story to create grounds to fire Colin because Colin had reported ongoing embezzlement (a crime under state law) by his superiors. Colin said he is considering suing his former employer.

In a addition to all applicable federal law, relevant state law recognizes all tort and contract law covered in the course. State law also embraces an official policy creating a duty in all citizens to report any potentially criminal behavior they might observe.

Does Amanda have any claims based on the two comment from her former employer? (identify the potential cases of action, the elements of any causes of action, and the facts supporting each element)

Does Colin have any potential claims against his former employer? (identify the potential claim and the legal nd factual foundation of each)