Davis vs. the Board of County Commissioners of Doa Ana County Essay

Davis vs. the Board of County Commissioners of Doa Ana County - Essay Example The court concludes that Dona Ana Country deserves to be accountable for negligent referral (misinterpretation) due to positive references. When Herrera got a position as the mental health technician, he was allegedly accused of sex assault by the plaintiff and physically abused female patients. In case an organization provides misleading references that can contribute to the harm of employees in the new job, the jurisdictions have the right to sue that organization for the negligent referral. According to Kohn, Kohn and Colapinto, the court of appeal has the right to judge Steele and Mochen for not taking into considerations the harm caused to the third party and the risk that may be encountered in the end. The government has the laws that protect all employees and the third parties in an organization from any harm imposed upon them. The US departments of Labor and its divisions have varied laws, which can shield third parties or employees in the workplace. Cases of negligent or a m isinterpretation of any information provided regarding employees that may pose risks to other employees is illegal. Therefore, the court made it very clear that Herrera was not supposed to provide employment reference since he was a former employee at MVH. Therefore, Herrera could have remained silent, but in case he chose to present the reference, the MVH has a duty to present factual information about him. However, since Sleeve and Mochen made a decision of presenting signed written misinterpreted information by omitting Herrera’s references, they were liable for this action. This is because Herrera could not be trusted as an employee who could deliver effective services as his behaviors could bear worse results; thus portraying a bad image to the company. Should it have mattered that the former employer’s investigation was not able to confirm all of the allegations against Herrera? Explain your answer. It should have mattered that the former employer’s invest igation was not able to confirm all the allegations against Herrera because the decision relied upon legal issues. This legal issue places an individual who either deliberately or negligently offers false information to another party for the physical assault,