_________________, Complainant, v. Ken L. Salazar, Secretary, Department of the Interior (Bureau of Land Management), Agency.

10 Cited authorities

Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.
510 U.S. 17 (1993) Cited 12,766 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"
Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,707 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
Pullman-Standard v. Swint
456 U.S. 273 (1982) Cited 1,630 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"
Henson v. City of Dundee
682 F.2d 897 (11th Cir. 1982) Cited 984 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that where a supervisor makes sexual overtures to employees of both genders, or where the conduct is equally offensive to male and female workers, the conduct may be actionable under state law, but it is not actionable as harassment under Title VII because men and women are accorded like treatment
McKinney v. Dole
765 F.2d 1129 (D.C. Cir. 1985) Cited 144 times
Holding that sexual harassment, to be illegal, "need not take the form of sexual advances or of other incidents with clearly sexual overtones"
Section 2000e - Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 2000e Cited 52,877 times 132 Legal Analyses
Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions
Section 794 - Nondiscrimination under Federal grants and programs
29 U.S.C. § 794 Cited 12,778 times 30 Legal Analyses
Adopting ADA standards for Rehabilitation Act claims
Section 791 - Employment of individuals with disabilities
29 U.S.C. § 791 Cited 2,319 times 6 Legal Analyses
Adopting standards for ADA claims under § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, including 42 U.S.C. § 12112, which forbids discrimination "against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability . . ."
Section 1614.108 - Investigation of complaints
29 C.F.R. § 1614.108 Cited 183 times 2 Legal Analyses
Describing inquisitorial nature of investigation process
Section 1614.405 - Decisions on appeals
29 C.F.R. § 1614.405 Cited 83 times 3 Legal Analyses
Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"

_________________, Complainant, v. Ken L. Salazar, Secretary, Department of the Interior (Bureau of Land Management), Agency.

10 Cited authorities

Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"

Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"

Holding that sexual harassment, to be illegal, "need not take the form of sexual advances or of other incidents with clearly sexual overtones"

Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions

Adopting ADA standards for Rehabilitation Act claims

Adopting standards for ADA claims under § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, including 42 U.S.C. § 12112, which forbids discrimination "against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability . . ."

Describing inquisitorial nature of investigation process

Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"