An employer can be held liable for quid pro quo same-sex harassment that occurred before a federal right to be free of same-sex harassment in the form of a hostile environment was established, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held Nov. 23 (Kelly v. City of Oakland, 9th Cir., Nos. 98-16482 and 98-16684, 11/23/99).

“Same-sex harassment in the form of a request for sexual favors on a quid pro quo basis “was a clear violation of federal law at all relevant times,” the court said in an opinion written by Judge John T. Noonan, and a jury was therefore justified in returning a verdict against the city of Oakland, Calif., and Kent McNab, a city park ranger who supervised the plaintiff, Stephen M. Kelly. The court reversed a verdict against the city’s chief park ranger on the ground that he had not been made aware of the quid pro quo harassment.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]