The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

After being interviewed on February 20, 1987, by William Zammer, D's president, P was employed by D as its marketing director beginning March 23, 1987. P was pregnant at the time of her interview with Zammer and P knew it. During the interview, P told Zammer, without any solicitation by Zammer, that her husband stayed home and took care of their two children with the help of an au pair and that 'she was not planning on having any more kids.' On April 24, 1987, P told Zammer that she was pregnant. Zammer was extremely upset by that revelation. He told her that the situation was 'untenable' and that she could not continue in the position for which she had been employed. He said that he felt 'personally betrayed.' Zammer told her that she had lied to him about being career-oriented. P denied that she had lied. On the Monday following April 24, P proposed to Zammer that her employee status be terminated and that, instead, she be considered an independent contractor. P and D then entered into such a relationship which lasted until the middle of July 1987. Zammer was upset that she lied and didn’t care if P was pregnant or not. Zammer told P that she had lied to him and he would not be able to trust her anymore. The contractor relationship lasted 3 months and D terminated P. P sued D claiming she was terminated because of her pregnancy.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.