Legal Opinion
Ramona HOLLOWAY, Appellant, v. ARTHUR ANDERSEN AND COMPANY, Appellee
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 23, 1977No. 76-2248PublishedCited by 78 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NIELSEN, District Judge:
Appellant, Ramona Holloway, a transsexual, claims that appellee, Arthur Andersen and Company, an accounting firm, discriminated against her in employment on account of her sex and has therefore violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Appellant appeals from the trial court’s judgment granting Andersen’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court determined that Title'-VII does not embrace transsex-ual — discriminaficmr AFFIRM.
I
Holloway was first employed by Arthur Andersen in 1969 and was then…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Bolling v. SharpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Frontiero v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Graham v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Leah Rosenfeld v. Southern Pacific Company, a Delaware Corporation, Leah Rosenfeld v. Southern Pacific Company, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by78 opinions
- Bostock v. Clayton CountySupreme Court of the United States · 2020
- Douglas W. Schwenk v. James Hartford Steve Sinclair Robert Mitchell,opinionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Smith v. City of Salem, OhioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Larry Davis v. Ruby Foods, Inc., Doing Business as Dunkin' Donuts, Inc., and Baskin-Robbins, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2001
- Karen Frances ULANE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EASTERN AIRLINES, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.