Hampton V. Snead State Case Study

1. In the case of Hampton v. Snead State Community College (SSCC), the one element that Hampton failed to establish of a prima facie case of racial discrimination was the forth element in the case. The forth element in the case stated, “SSCC treated similarly situated employees outside of Hampton's protected class more favorably” (Hampton). According to the court, Hampton failed to establish the prima facie case of bring substantial evidence of employees of another race who were tried fairly. The plaintiff brought evidence of three colleagues, also coaches, who were White (Adam Rhoden, Steve Machen, and Gerry Ledbetter) who engaged in misconduct and were not demoted or transferred to another division. However, the first two coaches that Hampton supplied, as evidence to the court did not suffice because both coaches, Rhoden and Machen, incident involved another athletic director than whom the plaintiff was suing. The third coach involved in the evidence, Coach Ledbetter, was also deemed an insufficient example because Ledbetter’s misconduct was different than that of the plaintiff. Therefore, since the plaintiff was not able to cover the final element of a prima facie case of racial discrimination, the plaintiff request of summary judgment was denied.

2. The NFLPA has learned two
I believe that these sanctions are beneficial because they allow students to receive the resources and help needed in the unfortunate event sexual harassment and misconduct has been reported. In addition, the sanction force universities and colleges to keep track of the sexual misconduct. With the stricter rules, the sanctions implemented toward disciplinary action will protect students from repeat actions from an alleged student and it will help to reduce the number of incidents that goes unresolved. On the other hand, with the stipulation of imposing fines the schools will be motivated to make sure that cases regarding sexual misconduct will be resolved and victims are