Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Employment – discrimination — employer liability

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 2, 2012//

Employment – discrimination — employer liability

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 2, 2012//

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Employment – discrimination — employer liability

Where the record demonstrated only personal animosity between two co-workers, the district court properly granted summary judgment to the employer on a discrimination claim by one of the employees.

“Because Dr. Catchatourian was a coworker, Dr. Jajeh must set forth sufficient facts to establish that Cook County was negligent in either discovering or remedying the harassment. Vance, 646 F.3d at 470. ‘Generally, we do not consider an employer to be apprised of the harassment unless the employee makes a concerted effort to inform the employer that a problem exists.’ Rhodes, 359 F.3d at 506 (internal quotation marks omitted). Once an employer is aware of workplace harassment, it can avoid liability by taking ‘prompt and appropriate corrective action reasonably likely to prevent the harassment from recurring.’ Vance, 646 F.3d at 471. Dr. Jajeh makes no claim that Cook County had constructive notice of the alleged harassment; therefore, the relevant inquiry is whether Dr. Jajeh’s complaints gave Cook County enough information ‘to make a reasonable employer think there was some probability’ that he was being harassed on the basis of his religion or national origin. Yancick v. Hanna Steel Corp., 653 F.3d 532, 550 (7th Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). Although Dr. Jajeh’s letters to Drs. Lad and Benson state that he was being discriminated against by Dr. Catchatourian, the letters in their entirety only vaguely complain about the personality issues he had with her. ‘Title VII does not prohibit all verbal or physical harassment in the workplace,’ Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 80 (1998); it is directed only at ‘discriminat[ion] . . . because of . . . religion . . . or national origin,’ 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1).”

Affirmed.

11-2331 Jadeh v. County of Cook

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Darrah, J., Kanne, J.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests