§Why CasetextPricing

HARRIS v. CITY OF SANTA MONICA

Respondent's Opening Brief on the Merits

80 Cited authorities

  1. Faragher v. Boca Raton

    524 U.S. 775 (1998)   Cited 9,314 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

  2. Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth

    524 U.S. 742 (1998)   Cited 7,127 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"

  3. Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa

    539 U.S. 90 (2003)   Cited 2,461 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that circumstantial evidence alone can sustain a mixed-motive verdict

  4. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins

    490 U.S. 228 (1989)   Cited 4,615 times   161 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer discriminated on the basis of sex when he "act[ed] on the basis of a belief that a woman cannot be aggressive, or that she must not be"

  5. Kolstad v. Am. Dental Assn

    527 U.S. 526 (1999)   Cited 1,463 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer may avoid punitive damages under § 1981a if it has made good-faith efforts to prevent discrimination in the workplace

  6. Yanowitz v. L'Oreal USA Inc.

    36 Cal.4th 1028 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 1,534 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to establish a "protected activity," an "employee's communications to the employer [must] sufficiently convey the employee's reasonable concerns that the employer has acted or is acting in an unlawful discriminatory manner."

  7. Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 83 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,763 times   45 Legal Analyses
    Holding unilateral arbitration provision substantively unconscionable

  8. White v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.

    533 F.3d 381 (6th Cir. 2008)   Cited 954 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that the McDonnell Douglas/Burdine burden-shifting framework does not apply to the summary judgment analysis of Title VII mixed-motive claims"

  9. Soule v. General Motors Corp.

    8 Cal.4th 548 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 1,252 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the consumer expectations test was not appropriate for a claim that a car was defective because the wheel assembly detached in accident

  10. Wright v. Murray Guard, Inc.

    455 F.3d 702 (6th Cir. 2006)   Cited 608 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that sexual harassment is more serious than admitting an unauthorized person into the workplace and spreading rumors because the harassment "caused actual serious harm to ... people"

  11. Section 2000e - Definitions

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e   Cited 51,650 times   129 Legal Analyses
    Granting EEOC authority to issue procedural regulations to carry out Title VII provisions

  12. Section 2000e-2 - Unlawful employment practices

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2   Cited 28,415 times   171 Legal Analyses
    Adopting case law prior to June 4, 1989, “with respect to the concept of ‘alternative employment practice’ ”

  13. Section 2000e-5 - Enforcement provisions

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5   Cited 26,960 times   124 Legal Analyses
    Holding charges must be made in writing, under oath, and contain all information as the Commission requires

  14. Section 1981a - Damages in cases of intentional discrimination in employment

    42 U.S.C. § 1981a   Cited 4,164 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "additional remedies under Federal law are needed to deter unlawful harassment and intentional discrimination in the workplace"

  15. Section 2000e-7 - Effect on State laws

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e-7   Cited 204 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing validity of state antidiscrimination provisions

  16. Section 33-12A-3 - Termination of contractual relationship; notice; good cause

    W. Va. Code § 33-12A-3   Cited 4 times
    Prohibiting an insurance company from discharging its agents except for "good cause"

  17. Section 7285.1 - Construction. [Renumbered]

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 7285.1   Cited 4 times

    Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 2, § 7285.1 1. Change without regulatory effect renumbering former section 7285.1 to new section 11001 filed 10-3-2013 pursuant to section 100, title 1, California Code of Regulations (Register 2013, No. 40). Note: Authority cited: Section 1418(a), Labor Code; and Section 12935(a), Government Code. Reference: Part 4.5 of Division 2, Labor Code; and Part 2.8 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. 1. Change without regulatory effect renumbering former section 7285.1 to

  18. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,189 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or