Grammer help needed for business law paper

HI,
Please, can someone help me to edit (grammer, puctuations...) this paper.
Thanks

Citation

Alberty-Vélez v. Corporación de Puerto Rico

United Stated Court of Appeals, First Circuit, 2004

361 F.3d 1

Facts

Alberty- Vélez and Corporación de Puerto Rico para la Difusion Publica (“WIPR) contract started when Alberty appointed by the WIPR to co-host the show “Desde Mi Pueblo”. For hosting the show “Desde Mi Pueblo,” Alberty signed a new contract for each episode instead of signing a single contract. According to the Alberty’s contract, she was only permitted to do “Desdi Mi Pueble.” Therefore, she did not have any obligation to perform anything else for the WIPR.

Although she was under direction of the show director and producer, the WIPR was not responsible for providing personal accessories for her look for the show. However, the WIPR was required to provide the necessary equipment to filming the show. She could obtain the sponsor with the permission of the WIPR. For each episode, she was paid, lump sum amount of $400 to $550 without withholding of any taxes from income and did not provide any benefits. Alberty’s tax return also described her an independent contractor because WIPR never provided W-2 form to the Alberty.

After November 1994, WIPR stopped contracting with Alberty when she became pregnant and went to maternity leave. She wanted to join the WIPR again, but they denied. She filled a suit against the WIPR, alleging that WIPR violated her rights under the anti-discrimination law. Through out of this lawsuit Alberty’s employee status had been challenged.

On December 24, 1998, the district court issued pre-trial adjudication in the Alberty’s favor, and declared her a WIPR’s employee because Alberty was receiving the unemployment compensation from the Puerto Rico Department of Labor after termination of her contract. And the Puerto Rico Department of Labor was indicating her employee of WIPR. However, at the subsequent trial, the court reversed the judgment in the favor of defendant “WIPR” because the plaintiff “Alberty” was an independent contractor.

Issue

1. Did Alberty-Velez discriminate under Title VII of the Civil Right Act or the anti-discrimination law? Or Whether WIPR violated laws of discrimination

2. Was she an employee of the Corporacion de Puerto Rico para la Difusion Publica (“WIPR”) or was she an independent contractor of the “WIPR” or an employee?

Decision

Yes, the United Court of Appeals, first circuit affirmed the decision of the district court in the favor of the WIPR.

Reason

The court acknowledged that Alberty was an independent contractor, not an employee. Alberty’s choice of contract does not provide her protection under Title VII the Civil Right Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, P.R. Laws Ann. Tit. 29, 146 et seq., and P.R. Laws Ann. Tit. 29, 467 et seq. Alberty failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove unlawful discrimination against gender and pregnancy, and employee relationship with WIPR. However, Alberty argued that WIPR was controlling and directed her. The court denied because the direction was necessary for WIPR to accomplish the production of the show.

Additionally, Alberty-Velez claimed that she is an employee of WIPR because she was earning the mostly income from the WIPR “as a matter of economics reality.” However, the court denied because under the common law “economic reality” can not determine the employee status. Therefore, Alberty argument does not support her as an employee of the WIPR. Then, Alberty argued that her relationship of sixteen month with WIPR shows her an employee of the WIPR. The court said that duration of the work can not be considered to determine the relationship of Alberty and the WIPR. Moreover, she also argued that the Puerto Rico Department of Labor considered her an employee of WIPR because she was receiving the unemployment benefit while she was not working. The court concluded that federal law determine the employee status under Title VII the Civil Right Act, therefore it would be insignificant to determine employee status under Title VII because this a issue of federal law.

The factors that determine employee-employer relationship determine her independent contractor. She was free to get other opportunities other than WIPR. Furthermore, Alberty employment status in the tax document shows her an independent contractor. She was only paid for the days, she filmed the show. She did not even have the companies’ benefit. Therefore, the court decided that according to the nature of the contract Alberty was an independent contractor not an employee of the WIPR. And Title VII does not provide protection to independent contractor, so she was not discriminated. Alberty did not argued for further proceeding, so the WIPR won the lawsuit.