Frantaga C. Humphrey, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

8 Cited authorities

Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.
510 U.S. 17 (1993) Cited 12,601 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"
Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson
477 U.S. 57 (1986) Cited 6,582 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that sexual harassment may be actionable under Title VII as discrimination on the basis of sex if it is sufficiently severe and pervasive
Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,663 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 "
Henson v. City of Dundee
682 F.2d 897 (11th Cir. 1982) Cited 979 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
Walker v. Ford Motor Co.
684 F.2d 1355 (11th Cir. 1982) Cited 158 times
Holding that plaintiff established hostile environment where racial harassment made plaintiff “feel unwanted and uncomfortable in his surroundings,” even though it was not directed at him
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"
Vinson v. Taylor
753 F.2d 141 (D.C. Cir. 1985) Cited 93 times
Reversing evidentiary ruling that disallowed the testimony of other women's experiences in a Title VII, employment law context because such testimony could help establish that there was a hostile work environment
Delgado v. Lehman
665 F. Supp. 460 (E.D. Va. 1987) Cited 9 times
In Delgado for example, the Eastern District of Virginia held that "[a] prima facie case may be established through a legally mandatory, rebuttable presumption...."

Frantaga C. Humphrey, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

8 Cited authorities

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

Holding that sexual harassment may be actionable under Title VII as discrimination on the basis of sex if it is sufficiently severe and pervasive

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 plaintiff established hostile environment where racial harassment made plaintiff “feel unwanted and uncomfortable in his surroundings,” even though it was not directed at him

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

Reversing evidentiary ruling that disallowed the testimony of other women's experiences in a Title VII, employment law context because such testimony could help establish that there was a hostile work environment

In Delgado for example, the Eastern District of Virginia held that "[a] prima facie case may be established through a legally mandatory, rebuttable presumption...."