Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

Lutkewitte, Janet v. Gonzales, Alberto

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided February 3, 2006No. 04-5058Published

1Concurring in the judgmentBrown, Circuit Judge

While I concur in the decision to affirm the district court’s refusal to give a requested jury instruction, I write separately to suggest a legal — rather than a factual— justification for our judgment. The legal question at the core of this case is a narrow one: whether any of Janet Lutkew-itte’s allegations, even if accepted as true, qualifies as a “tangible employment action” under the framework established by the Supreme Court in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 118 S.Ct. 2275, 141 L.Ed.2d 662 (1998) and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 118 S.Ct. 2257,…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Faragher v. City of Boca RatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Burlington Industries, Inc. v. EllerthSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. Carole Tomka v. The Seiler Corporation, Daniel Lucey, David Polonsky and Timothy ConroyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
  5. Pennsylvania State Police v. SudersSupreme Court of the United States · 2004

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API