For many years, according to attorney Demi Sophocleous, the legal backdrop concerning constructive discharge resulting from sexual harassment has been bogged down in confusion, which the U.S. Supreme Court has not helped. She describes how the Court's establishment in 1998 of a "tangible employment action" test, meant to clarify employer liability standards, only resulted in a circuit split. And she argues that the Court's 2004 Suders decision may have only created a need for more litigation.
September 27, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
For the past couple of decades, the legal backdrop with respect to constructive discharge resulting from sexual harassment has been bogged down in confusion.
In an effort to clarify employer liability standards, the U.S. Supreme Court in two 1998 decisions developed a new test for sexual harassment grounded in a new term: “tangible employment action.”[FOOTNOTE 1]
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
