Legal Opinion
Furline v. Morrison
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided July 24, 2008No. 04-CV-1029, 04-CV-1114PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GLICKMAN, Associate Judge:
The District of Columbia Human Rights Act (DCHRA) prohibits employers from taking adverse personnel actions for discriminatory reasons or to retaliate for opposition to unlawful discrimination. The instant appeals require us to consider how these prohibitions apply where human resources personnel or other disinterested officials of an employer, who have no discriminatory or retaliatory ax to grind, decide to discipline an employee for legally permissible reasons on the biased recommendation of a low-level supervisor. We conclude that the issue turns on whether the…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Hamilton v. Howard UniversityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- Giordano v. SherwoodDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Propp v. Counterpart InternationalDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- Ware v. Nicklin Associates, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- TYRONE BRYANT v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIADistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.