Surname 1

Student’s Name

Professor’s Name

Course

Date

Issue on Lawsuit

The statute of limitations has to be based on the 950 code as opposed to the period of 6 months.

In this context, no claim is needed for one to prove v before they continue with the process of

filling the suit. The case authority’ stare decisis is not binding to all the cases, but it was based on

the particular case law prompting the decision.

In this case, fraud and corruption allow my filling less than two years later. Although

codes 945.6 and 950.6 limit you from suing the employee given that the organization in question

is a government employee, you are still permitted under the law to whistleblower against actions

and deeds that are unlawful. In this context, it is within your rights to highlight concerns that

relate to the organization regardless of the position that the statute of limitations happens to limit

you from suing. As it stands, you are at liberty to sue the organization and the human resource

employee at the same time since you are not limited by the statute of limitations, which states

that one cannot proceed with a civil claim once a period of two years has elapsed.

The case is characterized by a public employee suing a public employee. The purported

actions were done by a public employee on their own accord; hence the organization cannot be

sued on the grounds of vicarious liability. Still, whistleblowing is not limited under civil or

criminal laws; hence, the manager acted beyond what the law provides by wrongfully dismissing

you. Because of the facts of your situation, you can file the case under the fraud issue as well as

the unwarranted dismissal.