Cross v. Anthony & Sylvan Pools, Corp.

I cannot provide a summary of this case as an employment law ruling because the information provided appears to contain an error. According to the excerpt, this case (Cross v. Anthony & Sylvan Pools, Corp.) is actually described as "a judicial dissent in a family law case regarding alimony and anti-cohabitation clauses, not an employment law case." The excerpt states the dissent concerns enforcement of contractual provisions about terminating alimony based on cohabitation. This appears to be a family law dispute about divorce and alimony payments, not a workplace discrimination case, despite being listed with an employer name and discrimination claims. The case details seem to be mixed up or incorrectly categorized. Since this is not actually an employment law case that would affect workers' rights, I cannot provide the requested summary about workplace implications. If you have the correct employment law case details, I'd be happy to summarize those for you in plain English.