In the case of NewCorp, there are liability issues. Sam is a representative of the company as a supervisor, Paula an employee under his supervision. In many companies there are regulations that prohibit employees from getting emotional involved with other employees of the same company or team as a deterrent of title VII violations. As in the Sam's and NewCorp, Sam is abusing his authority and crossing the line into a sexual harassment case, and quid pro quo suit. Sam used his power as Paula's supervisor to obtain power over her, creating a hostile work environment. A quid pro quo suit is often seen in corporations, whether in cases of two employees involved in a previous love relationship, or often in supervisor employee scenarios. It is a violation of title VII, quid pro quo is often used as a mode to gain control of the employee through sexual advances in order to remain employed, or in cases of promotions or raises (Cheeseman, 2010). Sam acted as an agent of NewCorp and prevented the transfer of Paula stating that her transfer might later become a liability on the NewCorp is Paula was to get pregnant. Sam made an assumption based on the gender of Paula and not on facts. By Sam taking such approached Sam once more violated Paula's rights and disregarded the Pregnancy Discrimination Act under the discriminatory statue in title VII. For thus discussed above Newcorp actions need to make reflect training for all supervisors and employees, also should reflect an added security that no employee will ever be sexually harassed again, or their rights violated under title VII. In the case of NewCorp some of the legal issues presented are (1) Sexual harassment, unwelcome sexual advances, invitations, language, and pictures. Making the work environment hostile for Paula to work in. (2) Quid pro quo, in which Sam used to maintain power over Paula after the broken relationship between them abusing his power as a supervisor. (3) The violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). Sam used the gender of Paula as an excused to allow her transfer to another department where Sam would not have control of Paula. The violations above have both statutory and case law, the statues in place assist the courts, and however it is the case law that determines the interpretation of the case at hand. Because many statues have different interpretation, many judges use other cases in similar situations to determine the proper ruling.