QUESTION SET TWO

USA First, a nonunion employer that operates a chain of workout facilities, has had several reports of theft in the ladies locker room at its San Jose, California gym. After two wallets and some jewelry were reported to have been stolen during the previous days Zumba class, Dave, the general manager, decided that Helga, the locker room attendant on duty at that time, was the most likely suspect. After calling her into his office, he locked the door and directed her to take a seat at the far end of the room. Startled, Helga asked if she could have a witness or some kind of a representative. Dave refused, told her to sit down, and started grilling her about her activities at the gym that previous day. When Helga started crying, Dave became so annoyed that he started yelling loudly that he knew she was a thief and that she should just confess and get it over with. In fact, by the end of his tirade, he was screaming at her. Because all of the offices at the gym are poorly insulated, the receptionist, three members and their guests, a yoga instructor, and the bottled water delivery guy heard every word Dave said, or rather, screamed.

Helga, now sobbing, denied that she had stolen anything from anyone and asked what she needed to do to save her job. Dave said that in order to avoid being fired, she had to pass a polygraph exam, terms that she accepted. After making some calls to arrange for the test, he terminated his meeting with Helga. Dave then, in an abundance of caution, made arrangements to have a surveillance camera installed in the ladies locker room, with a live feed directly to his office just in case there were any reported thefts in Helgas absence.

1. Identify each legal issue that arises out of Daves conduct.

2. Identify and describe the rule the courts use to analyze each issue that you identified above. To receive points for this part of the question, you must reference a case in the course reading where the rule was applied to at least some of the issues that you identified. Be sure to provide the full name of the case and the page on which it appears in the course reading.

3. Discuss how the court applied the rule to the salient facts in that case.

4. Analyze our fact pattern, i.e., apply the rule to our fact pattern and describe the conclusion that you anticipate a court would reach based on the law and our facts with respect to each issue that you identified above.

5. If additional information would be helpful to your analysis, explain how and why it would impact the analysis.