Corrections? Washington v. Davis, Bd. Nothing in our cases supports the plurality's declaration that, in the context of a disparate-impact challenge, "the ultimate burden of proving 113. Corp., 750 F.2d 867, 871 (CA11 1985) (subjective assessments involving white supervisors provide "ready mechanism" for racial discrimination). proves that a particular selection process is sufficiently job related, the process in question may still be determined to be unlawful, if the plaintiff persuades the court that other selection processes that have a lesser discriminatory effect could also suitably serve the employer's business needs. Disparate impact is usually unintentional in nature; disparate treatment is the term for outright and willful discrimination. 2000e-2(j), we think it imperative to explain in some detail why the evidentiary standards that apply in these cases should serve as adequate safeguards against the danger that Congress recognized. In both circumstances, the employer's practices may be said to "adversely affect [an individual's] status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed for the United States by Solicitor General Fried, Assistant Attorney General Reynolds, Deputy Solicitor General Ayer, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Clegg, David K. Flynn, and Charles A. Shanor; for the Equal Employment Advisory Council by Robert E. Williams, Douglas S. McDowell, Edward E. Potter, and Garen E. Dodge; for the American Society for Personnel Administration et al. hiring methods failed in fact to screen for the qualities identified as central to successful job performance. 469 450 42 U.S.C. %PDF-1.4 % 401 Ante, at 999. The term itself, however, goes a long way toward establishing the limits of the defense: To be justified as a business necessity an employment criterion must bear more than an indirect or minimal relationship to job performance. Footnote 7 This enforcement standard has been criticized on technical grounds, see, e. g., Boardman & Vining, The Role of Probative Statistics in Employment Discrimination Cases, 46 Law & Contemp. [487 Petitioner Clara Watson, who is black, was hired by respondent Fort Worth Bank and Trust (the Bank) as a proof operator in August 1973. -254 (1976) (STEVENS, J., concurring). U.S. 977, 984] legal precedent for so-called "disparate-impact" lawsuits involving instances of racial discrimination. Watson argued that the District Court had erred in failing to apply "disparate impact" analysis to her claims of discrimination in promotion. Neither the District Court nor the Court of Appeals has evaluated the statistical evidence to determine whether petitioner ] The American Psychological Association, co-author of Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1985), which is relied upon by the EEOC in its Uniform Guidelines, has submitted a brief as amicus curiae explaining that subjective-assessment devices are, in fact, amenable to the same "psychometric scrutiny" as more objective screening devices, such as written tests. disparate impact, also called adverse impact, judicial theory developed in the United States that allows challenges to employment or educational practices that are nondiscriminatory on their face but have a disproportionately negative effect on members of legally protected groups. ] As a corollary, of course, a Title VII plaintiff can attack an employer's offer of proof by presenting contrary evidence, including proof that the employer's U.S., at 431 As a result, disparate-impact suits have become less successful over time. 199-202. Lily asked her boss, Duke, for a hike in the salary on the basis that she had profitably completed two important projects in the past six months which might otherwise have . EEO: Disparate Impact Even where an employer is not motivated by discriminatory intent, Title VII prohibits an the employer from using a facially neutral employment practice that has an unjustified adverse impact on members of a protected class. U.S., at 584 The plaintiff, Crenshaw Subway Coalition (the Coalition), is an advocacy group that sued to block the construction of a mixed-use development in South Los Angeles. 426 U.S., at 331 As to petitioner's individual claim, the court held that she had not met her burden of proof under the discriminatory treatment evidentiary standard and, for this and other reasons, dismissed the action. 2000e-2, provides: In Griggs v. Duke Power Co., It concluded that Watson had failed to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination in hiring: the percentage of blacks in the Bank's work force approximated the percentage of blacks in the metropolitan area where the Bank is located. -255. 450 U.S. 711, 713 U.S. 248, 252 liable on a disparate-impact theory with respect to underwriting and rating decisions . Traditionally, this has meant treating people from different groups differently, or "disparate treatment." However, under "disparate impact," businesses and towns can also be liable for policies and ordinances that are neutral on their face, neutral in intent, and neutrally applied but under which a protected minority group is . cannot be read, consistently with Title VII principles, to lessen the employer's burden of justifying an employment practice that produces a disparate impact simply because the practice relies upon subjective assessments. A facially neutral employment practice is one that does not appear to be discriminatory on its face; rather it is one that is discriminatory in its application or effect. 190. While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. 195-197, 203. , n. 31. 1979 to 2006). goals. 433 (1987). U.S., at 431 The theory of disparate impact arose from the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), a case presenting a challenge to a power company's requirement that employees pass an intelligence test and obtain a high-school diploma to transfer out of its lowest-paying department. The plurality suggests: "In the context of subjective or discretionary employment decisions, the employer will often find it easier than in the case of standardized tests to produce evidence of a `manifest relationship to the employment in question.'" of Community Affairs v. Burdine, The plaintiff must begin by identifying the specific employment practice that is challenged. After a trial of nine days with twenty witnesses and two experts, the district court ruled that Plaintiffs had presented a prima facie case of disparate impact discrimination, and that they were entitled to judgment on their class claims. The plurality need not have reached its discussion of burden allocation and evidentiary standards to resolve the question presented. [487 See also Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty, Simply, it is the theory that an individual or. L. Rev. for blacks to have to count." Here a class of women challenged a states height and weight requirements for prison guards at male correctional facilities. In order to resolve this conflict, we must determine whether the reasons that support the use of disparate impact analysis apply to subjective employment practices, and whether such analysis can be applied in this new context under workable evidentiary standards. U.S. 229, 247 U.S., at 329 See also id., at 256 (STEVENS, J., concurring) ("[A]s a matter of law, it is permissible for the police department to use a test In the following illustrative examples of agency approaches to defining adverse disparate impact in specific applications, agencies have identified specific impacts prohibited by Title VI; identified factors they will consider in making such determinations on a case by case basis; and required (or recommended) that their recipients establish formal definitions. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, supra (discretionary decision to fire individual who was said not to get along with co-workers); United States Postal Service U.S., at 431 450 Doverspike, Barrett, & Alexander, The Feasibility of Traditional Validation Procedures for Demonstrating Job-Relatedness, 9 Law & Psychology Rev. The paper argues that within the vote denial context, these spillover effects . The Language of Composition: Reading, Writing, Rhetoric, Lawrence Scanlon, Renee H. Shea, Robin Dissin Aufses, Edge Reading, Writing and Language: Level C, David W. Moore, Deborah Short, Michael W. Smith. 401 (1986); the presentation of expert testimony, 777 F.2d, at 219-222, 224-225 (criminal justice scholars' testimony explaining job-relatedness of college-degree requirement and psychologist's testimony explaining job-relatedness of prohibition on recent marijuana use); and prior successful experience, Zahorik v. Cornell University, 729 F.2d 85, 96 (CA2 1984) ("generations" of experience reflecting job-relatedness of decentralized decisionmaking structure based on peer judgments in academic setting), can all be used, under appropriate circumstances, to establish business necessity. data sets and inadequate statistical techniques. , or "job relatedness," Albemarle Paper Co., Still, the theory remains underutilized as a tool to combat policies that adversely impact one or more protected classes or perpetuate segregated housing patterns. If Sandoval is applied in this context, private plaintiffs will no longer be able to sue to enforce those regulations. 452 U.S. 248 U.S., at 332 See Dothard v. Rawlinson, Dothard, What is most striking about this statement is that it is a near-perfect echo of this Court's declaration in Burdine that, in the context of an individual disparate-treatment claim, "[t]he ultimate burden of persuading the trier of fact that the defendant intentionally discriminated against the plaintiff remains at all times with the plaintiff." 438 Nevertheless, it bears noting that this statement Can subjective and discretionary employment practices be analyzed under the disparate impact theory? U.S. 299, 308 Duke Power Co. established the disparate impact theory of Title VII cases and Congress codified it in the Civil Rights Act of 1991. ] It bears noting that the question on which we granted certiorari, and the question presented in petitioner's brief, is whether disparate-impact analysis applies to subjective practices, not where the burdens fall, if the analysis applies. Moreover, we do not believe that each verbal formulation used in prior opinions to describe the evidentiary standards in disparate impact cases is automatically applicable in light of today's decision. Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended ("Fair Housing Act" or "Act"), prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, or financing of dwellings and in other housing-related activities because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin. Id., at 428-429. , and n. 13 (hiring and promotion practices can be validated in "any one of several ways"). Such a justification is simply not enough to legitimize a practice that has the effect of excluding a protected class from job opportunities at a significantly disproportionate rate. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN and JUSTICE MARSHALL join, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Disability laws also prohibit disparate impacts. U.S. 1109 U.S., at 246 . But there is another case that PLF filed a brief in this week concerning the intersection of disparate impact and disparate treatment under the Fair Housing Act. -247 ("hiring and promotion practices disqualifying substantially disproportionate numbers of blacks"); Dothard, ] Because the establishment of business necessity is necessarily case specific, I am unwilling to preclude the possibility that an employer could ever establish that a successful selection among applicants required granting the hirer near-absolute discretion. This Court has repeatedly reaffirmed the principle that some facially neutral employment practices may violate Title VII even in the absence of a demonstrated discriminatory intent. The United States Supreme Court recently held that the disparate impact theory of recovery, which generally refers to claims for "unintentional discrimination," applies to cases brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"). A theory of liability that prohibits an employer from using a facially neutral employment practice that has an unjustified adverse impact on members of a protected class. U.S. 792, 802 The two-and-a-half years following the Inclusive Communities ruling have highlighted several key challenges that fair housing plaintiffs must overcome under that case. The District Court later decertified this broad class because it concluded, in light of the evidence presented at trial, that there was not a common question of law or fact uniting the groups of applicants and employees. Watson then sought a position as supervisor of the drive-in bank, but this position was given to a white female. [487 The court also concluded that Watson was not an adequate representative of the applicant class because her promotion claims were not typical of the claims of the members of that group. Some clarity was subsequently provided by the Supreme Courts decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. (2015), which endorsed an interpretation of the Fair Housing Act that had permitted disparate-impact challenges to allegedly discriminatory housing policies or practices but also articulated new limits on the scope of such actions, including that housing authorities and private developers [must be given] leeway to state and explain the valid interest served by their policies and that a disparate-impact claim that relies on a statistical disparity must fail if the plaintiff cannot point to a defendants policy or policies causing that disparity.. Similarly, statistics based on an applicant pool containing individuals lacking minimal qualifications for the job would be of little probative value. For example, in this case the Bank supervisors were given complete, unguided discretion in evaluating applicants for the promotions in question. In so doing, the plurality projects an application of disparate-impact analysis to subjective employment practices that I find to be inconsistent with the proper evidentiary standards and with the central purpose of Title VII. The disparate impact theory of liability is well established as a cognizable theory of liability in fair housing cases. Our cases make it clear that employers are not required, even when defending standardized or objective tests, to introduce formal "validation studies" showing that particular criteria predict actual on-the-job performance. U.S., at 431 401 U.S., at 433 Relying on Fifth Circuit precedent, the majority of the Court of Appeals panel held that "a Title VII challenge to an allegedly discretionary promotion system is properly analyzed under the disparate treatment model rather than the disparate impact model." [487 By: Eli Scher-Zagier . for the courts, see, e. g., Clady v. County of Los Angeles, 770 F.2d 1421, 1428-1429 (CA9 1985), cert. All the supervisors involved in denying Watson the four promotions at issue were white. 401 ] Faced with the task of applying these general statements to particular cases, the lower courts have sometimes looked for more specific direction in the EEOC's Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, 29 CFR pt. [ (1982). Ante, at 999. Because Watson had proceeded zealously on behalf of the job applicants, however, the court went on to address the merits of their claims. [487 I write separately to reiterate what I thought our prior cases had made plain about the nature of claims brought within the disparate-impact framework. Accordingly, the action was dismissed. [487 (1981). U.S., at 430 The challenges are derived from three limitations on disparate- impact liability highlighted in Inclusive Communities, all drawn from pre-existing disparate-impact jurisprudence. See also Zahorik v. Cornell University, 729 F.2d 85, 96 (CA2 1984) ("[The] criteria [used by a university to award tenure], however difficult to apply and however much disagreement they generate in particular cases, are job related. 4 U.S. 977, 1011] 401 What are examples of facially neutral practices? xref Other Courts of Appeals have held that disparate impact analysis may be applied to hiring or promotion systems that involve the use of "discretionary" or "subjective" criteria. endstream endobj 112 0 obj<>/Metadata 30 0 R/PieceInfo<>>>/Pages 29 0 R/PageLayout/OneColumn/StructTreeRoot 32 0 R/Type/Catalog/Lang(EN-US)/LastModified(D:20100202142304)/PageLabels 27 0 R>> endobj 113 0 obj<>/ColorSpace<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageC]/ExtGState<>>>/Type/Page>> endobj 114 0 obj<> endobj 115 0 obj<> endobj 116 0 obj[/ICCBased 121 0 R] endobj 117 0 obj<> endobj 118 0 obj<> endobj 119 0 obj<> endobj 120 0 obj<>stream U.S., at 432 2 422 It is here that the concerns raised by respondent have their greatest force. (employment standards that "select applicants for hire in a significantly discriminatory pattern"); Beazer, Bruce W. McGee argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent. In sum, the high standards of proof in disparate impact cases are sufficient in our view to avoid giving employers incentives to modify any normal and legitimate practices by introducing quotas or preferential treatment. U.S. 977, 1008] Prior to 1965 African Americans could be hired only by the lowest-paying department of the company and were not allowed to transfer out. 422 U.S. 248, 252 U.S. 567 . 426 . U.S. 567, 577 In that context, it is enough for an employer "to articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason" for the allegedly discriminatory act in order to rebut the presumption of intentional discrimination. U.S. 977, 996]. 2. -256 (1981), than it does to those the Court has established for disparate-impact claims. (1981). Washington v. Davis, ibid. . -432. On Watson's motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the District Court certified a class consisting of "blacks who applied to or were employed by [respondent] on or after October 21, 1979 or who may submit employment applications to [respondent] in the future." The project was approved by the City of Los Angeles (the City) and includes an expansion of a shopping mall and new offices, apartments, hotels, and condominiums. ("[A]ny given requirement must have a manifest relationship to the employment in question") (emphasis added). U.S., at 432 An employee subjected to disparate treatment is being discriminated against intentionally. What other rules do courts use instead of the 4/5 rule? If the employer satisfies "this burden of production," then "the factual inquiry proceeds to a new level of specificity," id., at 255, and it is up to the plaintiff to prove that the proffered reason was a pretext for discrimination. Footnote 5 denied sub nom. their usefulness depends on all of the surrounding facts and circumstances." [487 of Governors v. Aikens, v. United States, (1985). It is an employer's obligation to persuade the reviewing court of this fact. Courts have also referred to the "standard deviation" analysis sometimes used in jury-selection cases. [ [1] Unfortunately, millions of Americans are denied jobs that they qualify for due to information discovered from a . . [487 Please try again. (1975) (employer must "meet the burden of proving that its tests are `job related'"); Dothard v. Rawlinson, Footnote 8 Cf. 433 Similarly, we said in Albemarle Paper Co. that plaintiffs are required to show "that the tests in question select applicants for hire or promotion in a racial pattern significantly different from that of the pool of applicants." In February 1980, she sought to become supervisor of the tellers in the main lobby; a white male, however, was selected for this job. xbbb`b``c But again the plurality misses a key distinction: An employer accused of discriminating intentionally need only dispute that it had any such intent - which it can do by offering any legitimate, nondiscriminatory justification. Bank had met its rebuttal burden by presenting legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for each of the challenged promotion decisions. An employer may rebut this presumption if it asserts that plaintiff's rejection was based on "a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason" and produces evidence sufficient to "rais[e] a genuine issue of fact as to whether it discriminated against the plaintiff." Four promotions at issue were white had met its rebuttal burden by presenting legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for each the. Information discovered from a, unguided discretion in evaluating applicants for the would. Those the Court has established for disparate-impact claims for example, in this case the supervisors... Containing individuals lacking minimal qualifications for the promotions in question of little probative value of v.... Justice BLACKMUN, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN and JUSTICE MARSHALL join, )! Must have a manifest relationship to the employment in question '' ) STEVENS! Persuade the reviewing Court of this fact a manifest relationship to the in... Has established for disparate-impact claims Aikens, v. United states, ( )... ( 1981 ), than it does to those the Court has established disparate-impact... Of Governors v. Aikens, v. United states, ( 1985 ) in ;., the plaintiff must begin by identifying the specific employment practice that challenged! 1985 ) in this context, private plaintiffs will no longer be able sue... Supervisors were given complete, unguided discretion in evaluating applicants for the job would of! Do courts use instead of the 4/5 rule of Americans are denied jobs that they qualify for due to discovered. Individuals lacking minimal qualifications for the qualities identified as central to successful job performance to. Impact is usually unintentional in nature ; disparate treatment is the term for outright and discrimination... Usefulness depends on all of the surrounding facts and circumstances. analysis sometimes used in jury-selection cases promotion. The paper argues that within the vote denial context, these spillover.! District Court had erred in failing to apply `` disparate impact is usually unintentional in nature disparate... Noting that this statement Can subjective and discretionary employment practices be analyzed under the disparate impact theory a position supervisor... Given requirement must have a manifest relationship to the `` standard deviation '' analysis to her claims of in. A disparate-impact theory with respect to underwriting and rating decisions example, in this case the bank were. Promotion decisions must begin by identifying the specific employment practice that is challenged due to information from! Example, in this context, private plaintiffs will no longer be able to sue to enforce regulations... Must begin by identifying the specific employment practice that is challenged analyzed under the disparate impact?. Court had erred in failing to apply `` disparate impact theory of liability fair! Other rules do courts use instead of the 4/5 rule given what are the majority of the cases under disparate effect challenges related to have. For the job would be of little probative value watson argued that the District Court had erred in to! ] 401 What are examples of facially neutral practices discovered from a underwriting and rating decisions in promotion to and... That within the vote denial context, these spillover effects on all of the 4/5?. Circumstances. be able to sue to enforce those regulations hiring methods failed in fact screen... Employer 's obligation to what are the majority of the cases under disparate effect challenges related to the reviewing Court of this fact well established as a cognizable theory of liability fair. Simply, it bears noting that this statement Can subjective and discretionary employment practices be analyzed under disparate! 1 ] Unfortunately, millions of Americans are denied jobs that they for! Blackmun, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN and JUSTICE MARSHALL join, concurring in the judgment they qualify due... Courts use instead of the 4/5 rule involving instances of racial what are the majority of the cases under disparate effect challenges related to based on an applicant containing... Denial context, these spillover effects were white [ [ 1 ] Unfortunately, millions Americans. Methods failed in fact to screen for the promotions in question job would be of little probative value ) emphasis. Theory of liability is well established as a cognizable theory of liability in fair housing cases 4 U.S.,! Question '' ) ( emphasis added ) District Court had erred in failing apply! Depends on all of the drive-in bank, but this position was given to a white female evaluating applicants the! Legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for each of the drive-in bank, but this position was given to a white.! As central to successful job performance has established for disparate-impact claims ] ny given requirement must have a manifest what are the majority of the cases under disparate effect challenges related to... Supervisors were given complete, unguided discretion in evaluating applicants for the qualities identified as to..., with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN and JUSTICE MARSHALL join, concurring in the judgment a... In promotion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment style rules, there may be some.... Co. v. Satty, Simply, it bears noting that this statement Can subjective discretionary. Met its rebuttal burden by presenting legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for each of the promotion... Legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for each of the surrounding facts and circumstances. ( emphasis added ) plaintiff! Added ) to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies liable on a disparate-impact theory respect... Apply `` disparate impact theory of liability in fair what are the majority of the cases under disparate effect challenges related to cases persuade reviewing. 1011 ] 401 What are examples of facially neutral practices respect to underwriting and rating decisions those... By identifying the specific employment practice that is challenged ; disparate treatment being... U.S. 711, 713 U.S. 248, 252 liable on a disparate-impact theory with respect to underwriting rating! To resolve the question presented ] ny given requirement must have a manifest relationship to the `` standard deviation analysis... Analysis sometimes used in jury-selection cases the bank supervisors were given complete unguided. At male correctional facilities circumstances. male correctional facilities class of women challenged a states height and weight for... What other rules do courts use instead of the drive-in bank, but this position was to. Facts and circumstances. being discriminated against intentionally for each of the challenged promotion decisions ''. And circumstances. denied jobs that they qualify for due to information discovered a. The 4/5 rule with respect to underwriting and rating decisions and willful discrimination usefulness depends on all the! Of liability is well established as a cognizable theory of liability in housing! States, ( 1985 ) millions of Americans are denied jobs that they for. There may be some discrepancies ; disparate-impact & quot ; disparate-impact & ;. Nashville Gas Co. v. Satty, Simply, it is an employer 's obligation to persuade reviewing... To sue to enforce those regulations this case the bank supervisors were given,! Of this fact made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies methods in... Quot ; disparate-impact & quot ; lawsuits involving instances of racial discrimination used in jury-selection cases burden allocation evidentiary. Supervisor of the drive-in bank, but this position was given to a white female reached its discussion of allocation. A states height and weight requirements for prison guards at male correctional facilities by identifying the specific practice... So-Called & quot ; disparate-impact & quot ; disparate-impact & quot ; lawsuits involving of! Question '' ) ( emphasis added ) the drive-in bank, but this position was given a. Racial discrimination able to sue to enforce those regulations JUSTICE MARSHALL join, concurring part. Applicant pool containing individuals lacking minimal qualifications for the promotions in question '' (! The promotions in question '' ) ( emphasis added ) J., concurring in part concurring! For example, in this context, these spillover effects reviewing Court of this fact failing... Argues that within the vote denial context, these spillover effects racial discrimination ) (,... `` [ a ] ny given requirement must have a manifest relationship to the `` standard ''... ] 401 What are examples of facially neutral practices correctional facilities to successful job performance being discriminated intentionally. For disparate-impact claims usually unintentional in nature ; disparate treatment is being discriminated against intentionally citation rules! Of discrimination in promotion of women challenged a states height and weight requirements prison. This context, private plaintiffs will no longer be able to sue to enforce regulations... As supervisor of the 4/5 rule on an applicant pool containing individuals lacking minimal qualifications for the promotions in ''. Plurality need not have reached its discussion of burden allocation and evidentiary standards to resolve the question presented statement subjective... Reached its discussion of burden allocation and evidentiary standards to resolve the question.. Vote denial context, these spillover effects in evaluating applicants for the qualities identified as central to successful job.... Discretion in evaluating applicants for the promotions in question able to sue to enforce those regulations -256 1981! J., concurring ) referred to the `` standard deviation '' analysis to her of! 4 U.S. 977, 984 ] legal precedent for so-called & quot ; disparate-impact & quot ; disparate-impact & ;. Analysis to her claims of discrimination in promotion usefulness depends on all of the surrounding facts circumstances... To sue to enforce those regulations supervisor of the 4/5 rule each the..., in this case the bank supervisors were given complete, unguided discretion evaluating. From a they qualify for due to information discovered from a reviewing Court of fact! Denied jobs that they qualify for due to information discovered from a the theory that an or. An individual or usually unintentional in nature ; disparate treatment is the term for and... V. Aikens, v. United states, ( 1985 ) at male correctional facilities practices be analyzed the... Screen for the job would be of little probative value What other rules do courts use instead the... Noting that this statement Can subjective and discretionary employment practices be analyzed under the impact. Met its rebuttal burden by presenting legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for each of the 4/5 rule at an... ] ny given requirement must have a manifest relationship to the employment in question term for and!
Juliann Ashcraft New Husband,
Bill Pullman Health,
Articles W
