Computers, Inc. has an employee who has special accommodation needs in order to perform her job. These special accommodations would cost Computers $$10,000$ to implement. The Americans with Disabilities Act $($ADA$)$ provides that an employer is required to make $$reasonable accommodation$$ for employees with a disability, but does not define $$reasonable accommodation$.$

Assume that the size of an employer$-$company determines the maximum amount of money that would be reasonable for an employer to spend to make $$reasonable accommodation$$ for a disabled employee. Under the principle of stare decisis, determine which of the following would apply to Computers.

A$.$ If a similar$-$sized employer$-$company had been required by a court to spend $$15,000$ in the past for reasonable accommodation, Computers likely would be required to spend the $$10,000.$

B$.$ If a similar$-$sized employer$-$company had not been required to spend $$15,000$ in the past for reasonable accommodation, this would ensure that Computers would not have to spend the $$10,000.$

C$.$ Whether a similar$-$sized employer$-$company had been required by a court to spend $$15,000$ in the past for reasonable accommodation would be irrelevant for Computers because it occurred in the past.

D$.$ Whether a similar$-$sized employer$-$company had been required by a court to spend $$15,000$ in the past for reasonable accommodation would be irrelevant for Computers; courts make all decisions on a case$-$by$-$ case basis.