§

James C. Boland, Complainant, v. Norman Y. Mineta, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.

07A00033 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 5, 2003)
James C. Boland, Complainant, v. Norman Y. Mineta, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.

6 Cited authorities

  1. Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson

    477 U.S. 57 (1986)   Cited 6,592 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

  2. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,675 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 "

  3. Pullman-Standard v. Swint

    456 U.S. 273 (1982)   Cited 1,626 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"

  4. Flowers v. Southern Regional Physician Serv

    247 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2001)   Cited 391 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there is evidence of disability-based harassment when a supervisor hovers around an employee's work area, eavesdrops on her conversations, and intercepts her phone calls

  5. Fox v. General Motors Corp.

    247 F.3d 169 (4th Cir. 2001)   Cited 364 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff presented evidence of "objectively severe and pervasive workplace harassment" under the ADA where the plaintiff had offered "a good deal of evidence that [his] supervisors ... in vulgar and profane language, constantly berated and harassed him and the other" workers with disabilities and that this harassment "occurred at least weekly"

  6. Lawson v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

    245 F.3d 916 (7th Cir. 2001)   Cited 217 times
    Holding that the plaintiff's diabetes and related medical conditions, which affected “many of the organ systems in his body,” were physical impairments under the ADA