Legal business questions regarding case decisions

4.A group home for individuals with development disabilities hires a single, sexually active male with no evidence of dangerous tendencies. The home used to have a policy against allowing male staff members to be alone with female residents, but the policy is no longer in effect. Is the home liable when the male staff member sexually assaults a female resident? [Niece v. Elmview Group Home, 904 P.2d 784 (Wash. App. 1995).] ( only has to come to around 1 paragraph)

5.Philips, an African American woman, applied for a position as secretary at the Mississippi legislature as a "walk-in" applicant. Phillips worked in the same building, which was made up of approximately 80 percent African American employees. She stopped by the office one day to ask if the office was hiring clerical help. She was told that the office was and she was given an application to fill out. After not hearing a response from the office regarding the position, she called and learned that a white woman with similar qualifications had filled the position, even though Philips applied before this woman. The office defended itself, claiming only that it has a practice of not contacting walk in applicants for positions. Philips claims that this policy disfavors African- American applicants who work in the building and is, therefore, illegal based on disparate impact. What result? ( only has to come to around 1 paragraph)

6. Eule Ford was a police officer with the city of Pagedale, Missouri, police department. After working there for four years, he was appointed Pagedale's acting chief of police. One year later, Leatrice Dowd was appointed mayor and Alvin Wilson succeeded Ford as permanent chief of police. Ford and Dowd did not have a good relationship; Dowd instituted disciplinary proceedings against him on several occasions(but the Pagedale board overturned the decision each time). After Dowd heard a rumor that Ford was associating with a reputed drug dealer, she ordered tha Ford undergo urinalysis testing and told him that failure to comply would result in serious disciplinary actions. The order requiring the testing stated that Dowd understood this rumor to mean that Ford was involved in "some type of illegal drug use and/or abuse." Ford complied with her order and all tests were found to be negative. However, Dowd's order remained in Ford's personnel file. When he later left the department and sought work elsewhere, he was unable to find employment as a result of this order in his file. Ford filed suit, claiming damagers as a result of the city's wrongful and vengeful testing program. [Ford v. Dowd, 931 F.2d 1286 (8th Cir.1991).] (only has to come to around 1-2 paragraphs)