Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Kennedy
We decide whether, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 253, as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 2000e et *747seq., an employee who refuses the unwelcome and threatening sexual advances of a supervisor, yet suffers no adverse, tangible job consequences, can recover against the employer without showing the employer is negligent or otherwise at fault for the supervisor’s actions.
í — H
Summary judgment was granted for the employer, so we must take the facts alleged by the employee to be true. United States v. Diebold, Inc., 369 U. S. 654, 655 (1962) (per curiam). The employer is Burlington…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Illinois Brick Co. v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4,507 opinions
- Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Clark County School District v. BreedenSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Vega v. Hempstead Union Free School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2015
- Holcomb, Christine v. Powell, DonaldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2006
- Pennsylvania State Police v. SudersSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
4,502 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.