Did the court agree that the villages had presented valid ...

[tingc95]

Did the court agree that the villages had presented valid justification for their residency requirements?

Question 2

Ted prepared fraudulent financial statements for the Arbor Corp Lacy read these statements before purchasing stock in the company. When Arbor goes bankrupt, Lacy sues Ted.
 a. Lacy will win because it was foreseeable that she would rely on these statements.
  b. Lacy will win because Ted was negligent.
  c. Lacy will lose because she did not rely on these statements.
  d. Lacy will lose because it was not foreseeable and she did not rely on these statements.
  e. Lacy will lose because it is not foreseeable that she would rely on these statements.

[Chocorrol77]

Answer to Question 1

No. The residency requirements, which had the effect of excluding blacks from employment in the two communities, were not justified. The requirements were not necessary job requirements but rather were arbitrary and unnecessary barriers unrelated to the measurement of capability as prohibited in Griggs.

Answer to Question 2

.A

[tingc95]

Gracias!

[kthug]

Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it