59 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 237,092 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 217,084 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.
530 U.S. 133 (2000) Cited 21,176 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that, since the 58-year-old plaintiff was fired by his 60-year-old employer, there was an inference that "age discrimination was not the motive"
Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White
548 U.S. 53 (2006) Cited 11,307 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"
Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
536 U.S. 101 (2002) Cited 10,314 times 31 Legal Analyses
Holding limitations period for hostile-work-environment claim runs from the last act composing the claim
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,377 times 95 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
Faragher v. Boca Raton
524 U.S. 775 (1998) Cited 9,315 times 100 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to be actionable, the alleged conduct "must be extreme" and "the sporadic use of abusive language, gender-related jokes, and occasional teasing" are not enough
Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth
524 U.S. 742 (1998) Cited 7,129 times 92 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer is not liable for a hostile work environment created by one of its employees when "the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior, and . . . the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to avoid harm otherwise"
Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson
477 U.S. 57 (1986) Cited 6,504 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
Pa. State Police v. Suders
542 U.S. 129 (2004) Cited 1,857 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that a hostile-work-environment claim is a "lesser included component" of the "graver claim of hostile-environment constructive discharge"
Section 2000e-1 - Exemption
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-1 Cited 658 times 20 Legal Analyses
Exempting religious employers from Title VII's prohibition against religious discrimination in hiring

EEOC v. ABM Janitorial Services, Inc.

59 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Holding that, since the 58-year-old plaintiff was fired by his 60-year-old employer, there was an inference that "age discrimination was not the motive"

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"

Holding limitations period for hostile-work-environment claim runs from the last act composing the claim

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

Holding that, to be actionable, the alleged conduct "must be extreme" and "the sporadic use of abusive language, gender-related jokes, and occasional teasing" are not enough

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 a hostile-work-environment claim is a "lesser included component" of the "graver claim of hostile-environment constructive discharge"

Exempting religious employers from Title VII's prohibition against religious discrimination in hiring