Dionne W.,1 Complainant, v. Dr. Heather A. Wilson, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

10 Cited authorities

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,575 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 "
Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody
422 U.S. 405 (1975) Cited 2,615 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employment policy cannot stand if another policy, "without a similarly undesirable racial effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate interest"
Pullman-Standard v. Swint
456 U.S. 273 (1982) Cited 1,614 times 4 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"
Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.
746 F.2d 4 (D.C. Cir. 1984) Cited 468 times
Holding that in enacting § 1988, Congress intended plaintiffs to recover wages lost during litigation
Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.
572 F. Supp. 354 (D.D.C. 1983) Cited 401 times
Finding that "the relevant legal market in this action is complex employment discrimination litigation [but] that this market is subject to the same hourly rates that prevail in other complex federal litigation"
Cygnar v. City of Chicago
865 F.2d 827 (7th Cir. 1989) Cited 168 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that evidence that patronage targets' names were known by defendant to be on Democratic Party contributors' list sufficient to support finding that defendant knew, despite his denial, of their political affiliations
Carter v. Duncan-Huggins, Ltd.
727 F.2d 1225 (D.C. Cir. 1984) Cited 116 times
Holding that the standards used to determine what constitutes a hostile work environment is the same under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Piper v. U.S. Department of Justice
339 F. Supp. 2d 13 (D.D.C. 2004) Cited 34 times
Finding public benefit where the disclosure "will assist the citizenry in making informed judgments" about the agency
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. ALC Security Investigations, Ltd.
823 F. Supp. 571 (N.D. Ill. 1993) Cited 10 times
Finding injunctive relief proper because the jury concluded there was a violation of the law and it was clear from the testimony at trial that the defendant still believed that its conduct was proper
Section 2000e-16 - Employment by Federal Government
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16 Cited 4,954 times 20 Legal Analyses
Adopting provisions of § 2000e-5(f)-(k), including that "[e]ach United States district court . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this subchapter"

Dionne W.,1 Complainant, v. Dr. Heather A. Wilson, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

10 Cited authorities

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 an employment policy cannot stand if another policy, "without a similarly undesirable racial effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate interest"

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 in enacting § 1988, Congress intended plaintiffs to recover wages lost during litigation

Finding that "the relevant legal market in this action is complex employment discrimination litigation [but] that this market is subject to the same hourly rates that prevail in other complex federal litigation"

Holding that evidence that patronage targets' names were known by defendant to be on Democratic Party contributors' list sufficient to support finding that defendant knew, despite his denial, of their political affiliations

Holding that the standards used to determine what constitutes a hostile work environment is the same under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981

Finding public benefit where the disclosure "will assist the citizenry in making informed judgments" about the agency

Finding injunctive relief proper because the jury concluded there was a violation of the law and it was clear from the testimony at trial that the defendant still believed that its conduct was proper

Adopting provisions of § 2000e-5(f)-(k), including that "[e]ach United States district court . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under this subchapter"