Mary Koonce describes herself as an optimist who does not wish to dwell on the unpleasant what-ifs in life. She is urged by her financial planner to perform a family needs analysis to insure against the risk of premature death. Mary insists this is unnecessary because she already made such an assessment ten years ago and has a life insurance policy guaranteeing a $250,000 death benefit. Mary is divorced, has two teenage sons and a seven-year-old daughter, and purchased her first home a year ago. Do you agree with Mary’s judgment regarding her needs analysis? If you were her financial advisor, what would you tell her

Research and review one of the following cases: 1. eeoc vs abercrombie and fitch inc. 2. young vs ups 3. vance vs ball state university after you have thought through and understand the case answer the following: 1. explain the facts of the case leading to the dispute. 2. define and show understanding of each of the terms assigned to your case. break the laws into components where necessary. eeoc vs abercrombie and fitch inc: 1) eeoc, 2) title vii, 3) disparate treatment discrimination, 4)disparate impact discrimination vance vs ball state university: 1) eeoc, 2) title vii, 3) hostile work environment, 4) a supervisor for title vii purposes young vs ups: 1) title vii, 2) pregnancy discrimination act, 3)american's with disabilities act, 4) reasonable accommodation 3.how do the above concepts come into play in the case? 4. what rule of law came from the case? what did the court decide? 5. based on your understanding of employment law was the ruling correct? explain using a legal principle.