North Carolina Jury Instruction — 1.2.1 Race and/or Sex Discrimination Discharge — Failure to PromotIncludingin— - Same Decision Defense is a legal instruction that pertains to cases involving allegations of discriminatory discharge or failure to promote based on race and/or sex. This instruction outlines the criteria and considerations that the jury must take into account when determining if the defendant is liable for violating anti-discrimination laws. Keywords: 1. North Carolina: Refers to the jurisdiction of this specific jury instruction, indicating that it is applicable within the legal framework of the state of North Carolina. 2. Jury Instruction: A set of guidelines and directions provided by the court to the jury members, informing them of the laws and legal standards relevant to the case they are currently presiding over. 3. Race and/or Sex Discrimination: Highlights that this instruction focuses on cases involving allegations of discriminatory actions based on an individual's race and/or sex, which are protected characteristics under anti-discrimination laws. 4. Discharge: Refers to termination or the act of firing an employee from their position. 5. Failure to Promote: Signifies the refusal or denial of an employee's advancement within an organization, despite meeting the necessary qualifications or requirements for a promotion. 6. Same Decision Defense: Refers to a legal defense that argues that the decision not to promote or to discharge an employee is justified and not influenced by discriminatory factors, highlighting that the same decision would have been made regardless of the individual's protected characteristics. 7. Liability: Pertains to the legal responsibility or accountability that the defendant may bear if found guilty of discriminatory discharge or failure to promote. Different types of North Carolina Jury Instruction — 1.2.1 Race And Or Sex Discrimination Discharge — Failure To PromotIncludingin— - Same Decision Defense may include various subcategories or specific scenarios, depending on further legal interpretations or case-specific circumstances. However, without specific instances mentioned, it is challenging to name the exact variations of this particular instruction.