Legal Opinion
Woodruff v. DiMario
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided October 31, 2000No. CIV.A. 00-0143(RMU)PublishedCited by 77 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
URBINA, District Judge.
Denying the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Retaliation Claim
I. INTRODUCTION
The plaintiff brings this action for disparate treatment on the basis of race, gender, and retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 et seq., as amended (“Title VII”). The matter now comes before the court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss the retaliation claim. After careful review of the complaint and the applicable law, the court holds that the complaint — as a matter of law — satisfies the minimum pleading standards…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by77 opinions
- Morrow v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Acosta Orellana v. CROPLIFE INTERN.District Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Lewis v. Drug Enforcement AdministrationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Quarles v. General Investment & Development Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 2003
- Tucker v. Howard University HospitalDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.