Whether Flowers proffered sufficient evidence in support of her prima facie case of racial-discrimination,retaliation,title-vii,42-usc-1981

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether Flowers proffered sufficient evidence in support of her prima facie case of racial discrimination and retaliation claims for a reasonable factfinder to reject Connecticut Light and Power Company’s, aka Northeast Utilities’, aka | Eversource Energy’s nondiscriminatory explanation for its decisions, adequate to sustain a finding of liability for intentional discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000e, et seq, and 42 U.S. Code § 1981. 2. Whether the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, as a matter of law, used the correct standard of review in its’ review of the District Court’s summary judgement decision. . 3. Whether the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, as a matter of law, violated Rule 56(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and sanctioned the District Court’s violation of Rule 56(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 4, Whether the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (Second Circuit)should have allowed Flowers to amend her pleadings to add a retaliation claim that grew out of her racial discrimination complaint filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.