CourtCases2010

One of the difficulties presented by this case arises

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: on retaliatory discharge was error, and (2) directed verdict on sexual harassment was error. Reversed. A motion for directed verdict should be granted only where no view of the evidence, and no view of the inferences drawn from the evidence, could support a verdict for the nonmoving party. When considering a motion for directed verdict, the court is required to evaluate the testimony in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, and every reasonable evidentiary inference must be considered in favor of the nonmoving party. If there is conflicting evidence or if different reasonable inferences may be drawn from the evidence, after presentation of party's case, then the issue is factual and should be submitted to the jury for resolution, rather than decided by directed verdict. Title VII forbids sex-based discrimination that alters the terms and conditions of employment in either of two ways: first, by way of a tangible employment action, such as a demotion, pay reduction or firing; or second, by creation of a hostile workplace environment caused by sexual harassment that is severe enough to effect an alteration. Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 701, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e; West's F.S.A. § 760.10(7). To establish a prima facie case of retaliation under Florida Civil Rights Act, employee must demonstrate: (1) that he or she engaged in statutorily protected activity, (2) that he or she suffered adverse employment action, and (3) that the adverse employment action was causally related to the protected activity. Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 701, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e; West's F.S.A. § 760.10(7). 275 Once employee makes prima facie case showing of retaliation under Florida Civil Rights Act, employer must articulate legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for adverse employment action and employee must then respond by demonstrating that employer's asserted reasons for adverse action are pretextual. Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 701, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e; West's F.S.A. § 760.10(7). Issue of whether female employee was terminated in retaliation for complaining about her supervisor's...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online