1. Sara lived in California with her husband, Jax. Sara and Jax separated, and Sara moved to Illinois.Ten months after the separation, Sara entered into an agreement with a moving company to pick up her personal property in California and deliver it to her in Illinois.She indicated to the moving company that she wanted full insurance on her property. The Estimate later sent provided that, at the time of pickup, Sara or her agent would need to indicate the insurance level for the goods. If not selection was made, the carrier would provide the standard level of insurance at $0.60 per pound.

The day of the move, Sara was in Illinois. She asked her husband to meet the movers, and she advised the movers that someone would be there at the California address to let them in and collect her belongings.Jax met the movers, let them in, and signed the bill of lading, electing the standard $0.60 per pound insurance.On the way to Illinois, the truck was hit by a train, resulting in the total loss of her property.The carrier claimed it was only liable $2,625 - based on the $0.60 per pound insurance coverage.Sara insisted that they pay the full insurance value.

Is the carrier liable?

2. Research and summarize a recent employment discrimination case from a reliable source (for example the EEOC website publishes recent cases litigated by the EEOC; scholar.google.com provides case reports across the US and can be searched; you may also use a Library database of news articles to find a case). Discuss how the case relates to the materials provided in this week's assigned reading.

https://ccbclegalstudiesbusinesslaw.wordpress.com/unit-4-legal-and-ethical-aspects-of-business/employment-law/enforcing-title-vii-eeoc/

Reading is under unit 4. Please let me know if you have access to the link. Thank you!