§Why CasetextPricing

HARRIS v. CITY OF SANTA MONICA

Respondent's Petition for Review

59 Cited authorities

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 52,110 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

  2. Faragher v. Boca Raton

    524 U.S. 775 (1998)   Cited 9,265 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

  3. Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.

    557 U.S. 167 (2009)   Cited 4,468 times   83 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act's language "because of such individual's age," required plaintiff show "age was the ‘but-for’ cause of the employer's adverse decision"

  4. Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth

    524 U.S. 742 (1998)   Cited 7,098 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"

  5. Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa

    539 U.S. 90 (2003)   Cited 2,453 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that circumstantial evidence alone can sustain a mixed-motive verdict

  6. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins

    490 U.S. 228 (1989)   Cited 4,604 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"

  7. Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 3,243 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."

  8. Ray v. Henderson

    217 F.3d 1234 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,265 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for purposes of a Title VII retaliation claim, "an action is cognizable as an adverse employment action if it is reasonably likely to deter employees from engaging in protected activity"

  9. Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd.

    7 Cal.4th 503 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 1,174 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there is no separate cause of action for civil conspiracy, and that to establish such an action, a plaintiff must show some other underlying tort or civil wrong

  10. Wright v. Murray Guard, Inc.

    455 F.3d 702 (6th Cir. 2006)   Cited 602 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 51,422 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 28,196 times   167 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 26,824 times   124 Legal Analyses
    Holding charges must be made in writing, under oath, and contain all information as the Commission requires

  14. Section 621 - Congressional statement of findings and purpose

    29 U.S.C. § 621   Cited 17,435 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"

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

    42 U.S.C. § 1981a   Cited 4,155 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "additional remedies under Federal law are needed to deter unlawful harassment and intentional discrimination in the workplace"

  16. Section 7286.7 - Affirmative Defenses to Employment Discrimination. [Renumbered]

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 7286.7   Cited 10 times

    Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 2, § 7286.7 1. Repealer and new section filed 6-20-80 as an emergency; effective upon filing. Certificate of Compliance included (Register 80, No. 25). 2. Editorial correction of Reference cite (Register 95, No. 6). 3. Change without regulatory effect renumbering former section 7286.7 to new section 11010 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. (Section 12935(a)

  17. Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1115   Cited 73,834 times

    (a) Unpublished opinion Except as provided in (b), an opinion of a California Court of Appeal or superior court appellate division that is not certified for publication or ordered published must not be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action. (b)Exceptions An unpublished opinion may be cited or relied on: (1) When the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or (2) When the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary

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

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,146 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

  19. Rule 8.1100 - Authority

    Cal. R. 8.1100   Cited 416 times

    The rules governing the publication of appellate opinions are adopted by the Supreme Court under section 14 of article VI of the California Constitution and published in the California Rules of Court at the direction of the Judicial Council. Cal. R. Ct. 8.1100 Rule 8.1100 adopted effective 1/1/2007.

  20. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 337 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer