Kristina A. Pruett, Complainant, v. Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary, Department of the Interior, Agency.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White

    548 U.S. 53 (2006)   Cited 11,799 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a jury could find a reassignment from a position with "an indication of prestige" to one involving less desirable responsibilities "would have been materially adverse to a reasonable employee"
  2. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 53,702 times   100 Legal Analyses
    Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision
  3. Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.

    510 U.S. 17 (1993)   Cited 12,791 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"
  4. 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
  5. Hochstadt v. Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology

    545 F.2d 222 (1st Cir. 1976)   Cited 249 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in balancing the scope of reasonable opposition conduct, "[t]he requirements of the job and the tolerable limits of conduct in a particular setting must be explored"
  6. Hochstadt v. Worcester Foundation, Etc.

    425 F. Supp. 318 (D. Mass. 1976)   Cited 87 times
    Holding that discharge six months after EEOC settlement and a month after an informal complaint satisfies causation requirement
  7. Section 2000e-16 - Employment by Federal Government

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16   Cited 5,070 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"