59 Cited authorities

Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.
530 U.S. 133 (2000) Cited 21,067 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"
Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
536 U.S. 101 (2002) Cited 10,242 times 31 Legal Analyses
Holding limitations period for hostile-work-environment claim runs from the last act composing the claim
Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.
510 U.S. 17 (1993) Cited 12,324 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"
Faragher v. Boca Raton
524 U.S. 775 (1998) Cited 9,267 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 7,099 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"
Vance v. Ball State Univ
570 U.S. 421 (2013) Cited 1,319 times 44 Legal Analyses
Holding "that an employer may be vicariously liable for an employee's unlawful harassment only when the employer has empowered that employee to take tangible employment actions against the victim," such as hiring and firing
Pacheco v. Mineta
448 F.3d 783 (5th Cir. 2006) Cited 939 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding disparate impact investigation could not reasonably grow from charge alleging individualized disparate treatment without identifying neutral employment policy
Laxton v. Gap Inc.
333 F.3d 572 (5th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,036 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the discriminatory animus of a manager can be imputed to the ultimate decisionmaker if the [manager]. . . . `had influence or leverage over'" the ultimate decisionmaker (quoting Russell v. McKinney Hosp. Venture, 235 F.3d 219, 226 (5th Cir.2000))
Ramsey v. Henderson
286 F.3d 264 (5th Cir. 2002) Cited 944 times
Holding that “conclusory allegations, speculation, and unsubstantiated assertions are inadequate to satisfy” the nonmovant's burden in a motion for summary judgment
LeMaire v. Louisiana Dept. of Trans
480 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 2007) Cited 759 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a two-day suspension without pay was an adverse employment action in the retaliation context
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,220 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 621 - Congressional statement of findings and purpose
29 U.S.C. § 621 Cited 17,437 times 21 Legal Analyses
Finding that "older workers find themselves disadvantaged in their efforts to retain employment, and especially to regain employment when displaced from jobs"
Section 23:303 - Civil suits authorized
La. Stat. tit. 23 § 303 Cited 209 times
Outlining a maximum prescription period of 18 months

Lacour v. Capital One Financial

59 Cited authorities

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

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

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 an employer may be vicariously liable for an employee's unlawful harassment only when the employer has empowered that employee to take tangible employment actions against the victim," such as hiring and firing

Holding disparate impact investigation could not reasonably grow from charge alleging individualized disparate treatment without identifying neutral employment policy

Holding that "the discriminatory animus of a manager can be imputed to the ultimate decisionmaker if the [manager]. . . . `had influence or leverage over'" the ultimate decisionmaker (quoting Russell v. McKinney Hosp. Venture, 235 F.3d 219, 226 (5th Cir.2000))

Holding that “conclusory allegations, speculation, and unsubstantiated assertions are inadequate to satisfy” the nonmovant's burden in a motion for summary judgment

Holding that a two-day suspension without pay was an adverse employment action in the retaliation context

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Finding that "older workers find themselves disadvantaged in their efforts to retain employment, and especially to regain employment when displaced from jobs"

Outlining a maximum prescription period of 18 months