Theresia L. Logan, Complainant, v. Louis Caldera, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.

    510 U.S. 17 (1993)   Cited 12,666 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"
  2. Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson

    477 U.S. 57 (1986)   Cited 6,601 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
  3. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,683 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 "
  4. 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"
  5. Andrews v. City of Philadelphia

    895 F.2d 1469 (3d Cir. 1990)   Cited 2,767 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "harassment is pervasive when 'incidents of harassment occur either in concert or with regularity'"
  6. Van Zant v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

    80 F.3d 708 (2d Cir. 1996)   Cited 1,037 times
    Holding that timeliness is "measured from the date the employee receives notice of the discriminatory decision
  7. Yates v. AVCO Corp.

    819 F.2d 630 (6th Cir. 1987)   Cited 292 times
    Holding that there was no adverse employment action where temporary transfer did not result in loss of salary or benefits
  8. Katz v. Dole

    709 F.2d 251 (4th Cir. 1983)   Cited 311 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that sexual harassment includes the use of "extremely vulgar and offensive sexually related epithets addressed to and employed about [plaintiff]"