Legal Opinion

NUSKEY v. Hochberg

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided July 19, 2010No. Civil Action 06-1573(PLF)PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.

This is an employment discrimination case in which the plaintiff, Sharon Nuskey, alleges gender discrimination and retaliation against the U.S. Export-Import Bank under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16.

Plaintiff seeks to call Colleen Getz, Michael Cushing, Monika Edwards, Cheryl Conlin, and Mary Beth Adamchick as trial witnesses to offer so-called “me too” testimony. See Sprint v. Mendelsohn, 552 U.S. 379, 128 S.Ct. 1140, 170 L.Ed.2d 1 (2008). 1 Plaintiff also seeks to introduce portions of Margaret…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sprint/United Management Co. v. MendelsohnSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  2. Harry B. Ansell v. Green Acres Contracting Co., Inc. Paul Humberston Thomas Pisula Douglas SchiffCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2003
  3. Elion v. JacksonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
  4. Elaine G. Parker v. Secretary, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
  5. Howard v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC SCHOOLSDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Perlean Griffin v. Carleton FinkbeinerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  2. Daniels v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
  3. Brooks v. ClintonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
  4. Johnson v. PerezDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
  5. Gibbs v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014

20 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