CourtCases2010

The jury returned its verdict on august 23 2004 it

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: 969 (5th Cir.1999). There, a teacher who was allegedly being sexually harassed by the school principal was interviewed by a school investigator regarding the conduct of the principal in connection with anonymous tips. During the interview, the teacher specifically denied that the principal was sexually harassing her and did not report the alleged harassment for the first ten months it occurred. The court held that the school district established its affirmative defense because the teacher lied and intentionally misled investigators when given the opportunity to reveal the harassment. We hardly think that Natson's reply to such a casual inquiry of how she was doing, which seems more like social pleasantries than a specific investigation, is sufficient to show that Natson unreasonably failed to avail herself of corrective opportunities. Unlike Scrivner, 259 no investigation was ongoing, and Young did not pose any specific question respecting harassment. While Eckerd may argue to the jury that Natson should have taken the opportunity to report the harassment when Young exchanged these pleasantries, this does not mandate a directed verdict in its favor. For these reasons, we reverse the final judgment and remand for a new trial. SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur. Fla.App. 4 Dist.,2004. Natson v. Eckerd Corp., Inc. 885 So.2d 945, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D2397 Briefs and Other Related Documents (Back to top) • 4D03-4191 (Docket) (Oct. 31, 2003) END OF DOCUMENT 260 Case # 27 DIAL CORPORATION vs. EEOC United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ Nos. 05-4183/4311 ___________ Equal Employment Opportunity * Commission, ** Appellee/Cross-Appellant, * * Appeals from the United States v. * District Court for the Southern * District of Iowa. Dial Corporation, * * Appellant/Cross-Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: September 25, 2006 Filed: November 17, 2006 ___________ Before MURPHY, HANSEN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges. ___________ MURPHY, Circuit Judge. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this sex discrimination action against The Di...
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