CEO was convinced by his employee, M. Ploy, that a coworker, A. Cused, had been stealing money from the company. At lunch that day in the company cafeteria, CEO discharges Cused from her employment, accuses her of stealing from the company, searches through her purse over her objections, and finally forcibly escorts her to his office to await the arrival of the police, which he has his secretary summon. Cused is indicted for embezzlement but subsequently is acquitted upon establishing her innocence. What rights, if any, does Cused have against CEO? Explain.

Cused have a number of rights such as: trepass to personal properly, intrusion, false imprisonment, and emotional distress against CEO.

Explanation:

From the above mentioned scenario we can figure out that despite Cused being innocent, the CEO accused her for stealing and also forcibly escorted her. In such situation Cused holds a number of rights against CEO.

Firstly, he have intrude her personal properly by checking her purse. Secondly, he have removed her using force which involves offensive touching.

Cused came into false light because of whatever happened. And the most important,  CEO have caused her emotional distress. Apart from this, encroachment is another right Cused have against CEO.

omg omg omg that looks so so

explanation:

so cut i love it x3

can you type the questions out? we cant really see anything