A woman who worked in the deli department at a Wal-Mart was assaulted in a walk-in cooler by a male coworker. The coworker lured her into the cooler, pulled her against him, kissed her, slipped his hand under her shirt, and felt her breast. The woman told two coworkers about the incident immediately after it occurred. She reported it to a supervisor the next day. She was asked to speak with a number of managers but was still upset over the incident and was allowed to take sick leave. Coworkers were interviewed over the next couple of days. The woman returned to work and completed a written statement a week later. The alleged harasser was away on vacation by that time. When he returned about two weeks later, he admitted to hugging the woman in the cooler but denied the other allegations. The company concluded that it could not substantiate the assault, given the lack of witnesses and conflicting statements. Rather than terminate the coworker, they issued a “decision-making day,” essentially a one-day suspension with the threat of subsequent termination. Unbeknownst to the woman, there had been an incident two years earlier in which the coworker had been accused of leering at and asking personal questions of another female employee. At that time, he was issued a warning about engaging in such conduct. When the coworker returned to work, Wal-Mart adjusted the two workers’ schedules to minimize the amount of time they would be working together and stationed them about 80 feet apart in their work area. Unsatisfied with the outcome, the woman decided to report the incident to the local police. The police interrogated the coworker and he confessed to the assault. Wal-Mart then immediately terminated the coworker. Is Wal-Mart liable for the coworker’s harassment? Why or why not?