used racial slurs in referring to maintenance employees, including Boyd, in directing them in their work. (DE 121-GO at 54; 121-63 at 92). Boyd also testified that Cochran “listened to the white tenants,” in the rooming house and treated them with “more dignity and respect.” (DE 121-62 at 16-17, 25-26). Cochran completed repairs for the Cannons and another white tenant, Gina Horton (“Horton”), in a manner suggesting a preference of white tenants over black tenants. (DE 121-71 and 121-72; DE 121-73). For example, Horton testified that her refrigerator broke down, she called Cochran, and he brought a new refrigerator that same day. (DE 121-73 at 40). Considering the most direct evidence of individual instances of Inc., No. 7:07-CV-48-F, 2013 WL 556380, at *5 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 12, 2013) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Matusoff Rental Co., 494
holding that allegations of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation necessarily state a claim of discrimination on the basis of sex recognizing that a plaintiff can sue on the basis of postacquisition conduct under  3604 and  3617 recognizing that the court of appeals can affirm a grant on summary judgment on any basis made apparent by the record holding that an award of restitution is only for the loss caused by the specific conduct that is the basis of the offense of conviction holding that a plaintiff can sue for retaliation under title vi