Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Employment – Sexual harassment – sex discrimination

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 20, 2012//

Employment – Sexual harassment – sex discrimination

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 20, 2012//

Listen to this article

Where a supervisor repeatedly called an employee a “bitch,” the evidence supported a jury finding of sexual harassment, but where her termination was part of budget cuts, the jury finding of discrimination was properly set aside by the district court.

“On Passananti’s sexual harassment claim, we reverse the district court and reinstate the jury’s verdict as to liability. The jury could reasonably treat the frequent and hostile use of the word ‘bitch’ to be a gender-based epithet that contributed to a sexually hostile work environment. Passananti also presented sufficient evidence to allow the jury to find that the gender-based harassment she suffered was severe and pervasive, and that she did not unreasonably fail to take advantage of available corrective measures in her workplace. However, we affirm the district court’s decision to set aside the jury’s verdict on Passananti’s discriminatory termination claim, which simply lacked any evidentiary support. As we explain below, there was considerable confusion in the district court’s handling of the different claims and damage awards, but we can discern that the jury must have found that $70,000 was the proper amount of compensatory damages on the sexual harassment claim.”

Affirmed in part, and Reversed in part.

11-1182 Passananti v. Cook County

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

Full Text

 

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests