In this interesting case, we have several facts. On the one hand, Mr. Daggett, representing plaintiff, Ms. Darcy, which is claiming that they have sufficient proofs for accusation Big Car’s Motion and its so-called supervisor, Clarence, for harassment, sex-abuse and that there was a hostile workplace environment for Ms. Darcy, their former employee. On the other hand, representing Big Car Motion company, Mr. Cheatam is trying to persuade that plaintiff do not have sufficient proofs for her claim.
Every Law system has many `black holes`` in which many facts swap in. However, we are learning how to respect our ...
