Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson et al.doc

Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson et al.doc - Page 1...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Page 1 LEXSEE 477 U.S. 57 MERITOR SAVINGS BANK, FSB v. VINSON ET AL. No. 84-1979 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 477 U.S. 57 ; 106 S. Ct. 2399 ; 91 L. Ed. 2d 49 ; 1986 U.S. LEXIS 108 ; 54 U.S.L.W. 4703 ; 40 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1822 ; 40 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P36,159 March 25, 1986, Argued June 19, 1986, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. DISPOSITION: 243 U. S. App. D. C. 323, 753 F.2d 141 , affirmed and remanded. CASE SUMMARY: PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Petitioner ob- tained a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Cir - cuit, to review its judgment that respondent's claims for sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 253, 42 U.S.C.S. ß 2000e et seq. , were of the hostile envir - onment type, that remanded the case to determ- ine if such a violation occurred, and that petition- er was liable if the violation occurred. OVERVIEW: After respondent's employment with petitioner was terminated, she filed an ac- tion under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.S. ß 2000e et seq. , claiming that her supervisor had sexually harassed her. The district court found that any relationship between respondent and her supervisor was vol- untary and unrelated to her work. The appellate court reversed the judgment of the district court and remanded the case, on a finding that the dis- trict court failed to determine it there was a hos- tile work environment. On certiorari, the court held that if the attentions of respondent's super- visor were unwelcome, then respondent had a claim for sexual harassment on the basis of a hos- tile work environment, even if any sexual acts were voluntary. Petitioner would be liable for the acts of its employee, if it could be found liable un- der general agency principles. OUTCOME: The court affirmed the judgment
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
and remanded the case. DECISION: Sexual harassment creating hostile or abus- ive work environment, without economic loss, held to violate Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USCS 2000e-2000e-17). SUMMARY: A female bank employee was allegedly sub- jected to sexual harassment by her male super- visor, including (1) public fondling, and (2) sexual demands, to which she allegedly submitted out of fear that she would otherwise lose her job. She filed suit against the supervisor and the bank in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia after she was terminated, claiming that the supervisor's conduct had violated her rights under Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USCS 2000e-2000e-17). The supervisor denied that he had had any sexual relationship with the employee. The District Court rendered judgment in favor of the supervisor and the bank without resolving that factual issue, holding (1) that the employee had not made out a case of sexual discrimination because any relationship that might have existed had been voluntary and
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/18/2011 for the course LAW 0856 taught by Professor Hodge during the Fall '10 term at Temple.

Page1 / 14

Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson et al.doc - Page 1...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online