Legal Opinion
Costilla v. State
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided November 25, 1997No. C8-97-711PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
NORTON, Judge.
Appellant sued the State of Minnesota for sexual harassment under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) and raised other common law claims. The district court granted respondent summary judgment on all claims. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
FACTS
During all times relevant to this case, appellant Maria Costilla was employed by respondent State of Minnesota in its Department of Economic Security (DES). As a state monitor advocate, she worked with urban Hispanics and seasonal migrant farm workers. Costilla was required to work closely with the corresponding…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Barbara J. HENSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF DUNDEE, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Krueger v. Zeman Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- Krueger v. Zeman Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
- State v. SoukupCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- Modern Continental/Obayashi v. Massachusetts Commission Against DiscriminationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
- Hayes v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1998
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.