Legal Opinion
Mallinson-Montague v. Pocrnick
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided September 19, 2000No. 98-1275, 98-1297PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MURPHY, Circuit Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Professional Bank (“ProBank”) appeals from a jury verdict and resulting judgment finding it liable for damages under Title VII for the sexual harassment of Rhonda Mallinson-Montague and Jessica Rotola (the “Plaintiffs”) by James Pocrnick, the Plaintiffs’ supervisor during their employ at ProBank. On appeal, ProBank asserts as follows: (1) it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law under the affirmative defense set forth by the Supreme Court in Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 118 S.Ct. 2257, 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998) and Faragher v. City of…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Faragher v. City of Boca RatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Burlington Industries, Inc. v. EllerthSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Ramos v. LammCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1983
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Helm v. KansasCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
- Townsend v. BENJAMIN ENTERPRISES, INC.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- Betts v. Costco Wholesale Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- Maestas v. State of ColoradoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Diane T. Gowski, M.D. v. James PeakeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.