A homeowner filed a federal diversity action against the manufacturer of a pressure cooker for a products liability action based on state law, alleging that she was severely burned because the top flew off the pressure cooker during operation. Under the state law, a jury verdict does not have to be unanimous. However, a specific rule under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directly conflicts with the state law and provides that jury verdicts in federal court must be unanimous. Which statement correctly presents what law the federal judge should apply regarding the jury verdict

The federal rule must apply in this case.

Explanation:

A federal court must, in fact, apply to state law when it has a case that was initiated under state law. However, when this case is also based on diversity of citizenship, a federal statute, or a federal rule, as shown in the case above, the court must apply the federal rule, provided that procedural rule does not interfere or deny any right, as shown in the case of the question above. Therefore, the court must apply federal rule.

"quid pro quo" harassment takes place when a supervisor requires sex, sexual favors, or sexual contact from an employee/job candidate as a condition of their employment. only supervisors who have the authority to make tangible employment actions (i.e. hire, fire, promote, can commit "quid pro quo" harassment.

the numbers are even higher.

explanation:

statistics have shown that more that 60% of test takers fail the first time and have to retake the test.