42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2

In a Title VII sexual harassment claim, the jury may assess whether the workplace was objectively hostile from the perspective of a reasonable person with the plaintiff’s fundamental characteristics.

Crowe v. Wiltel Communications Systems · filed 1996-12-26

The district court offered the following instruction: “This is an objective standard, and you must look at the evidence from the perspective of a reasonable person’s reaction to a similar environment under similar circumstances with the same fundamental characteristics as plaintiff.” ... Since the district court quoted from Fuller verbatim, it did not abuse its discretion in giving this jury instruction.

Section 2000e-2 permits a hostile work environment claim against an employer for harassment by a nonemployee when the employer knows of the harassment and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action within its control.

Jarman v. City of Northlake · filed 1997-01-16(a)(1)

Had the City exercised its ability to control Dexter “immediately” after being put on notice of his conduct rather than waiting five months to do so, liability under § 1604.11(e) would probably not attach, but in light of the delay we cannot dismiss Jarman’s claim for hostile work environment sexual harassment at this juncture.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim when workplace sexual assault is severe enough to establish a hostile environment.

Bayard v. Riccitelli · filed 1997-01-24(a)(1)

Moreover, both say they were physically assaulted by Riccitelli at the worksite, acts sufficiently severe for the factfinder to find from that alone the existence of a hostile work environment.

A hostile work environment claim under § 2000e-2(a)(1) requires harassment based on sex that is severe or pervasive enough to make the environment objectively hostile.

Scarborough v. Brown Group, Inc. · filed 1997-03-11(a)(1)

The undisputed facts in the record show that Lowery simply was not subjected to sexual harassment that was severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires hostile environment harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an abusive working environment.

Drew v. First Sav. of NH · filed 1997-04-02(a)(1)

"Hostile environment harassment" consists of "offensive gender- based conduct that is 'severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment--an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive' and is subjectively perceived by the victim to be abusive."

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sexual harassment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment.

Drew v. First Sav. of New Hampshire · filed 1997-04-02(a)(1)

Viewed through such legal lens, the circumstances of which plaintiffs here complain do not serve to bring their claims within the purview of Title VII. The gist of the complaint concerns two uninvited hugs over a three-week period, accompanied by candy and “Love, Steph” notes, and the falsehood told Wentworth, followed by a request for protective silence from a supervisory employee.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires evidence of sufficiently severe or pervasive discrimination to sustain a hostile work environment claim; isolated incidents alone do not suffice.

Castro v. Local 1199, National Health & Human Services Employees Union · filed 1997-04-23(a)(1)

In the absence of proof of additional instances of such offensive conduct, I find that plaintiff has failed to raise an issue of fact requiring trial on her Title VII claim under the theory of hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sex-based harassment that is severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile work environment.

Black v. Zaring Homes, Inc. · filed 1997-04-25(a)(1)

Nevertheless, although the comments were sex-based, we hold that the evidence is insufficient to support a finding that they were severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires courts to assess the duration of a sexually hostile work environment under the totality of the circumstances.

Konstantopoulos v. Westvaco Corp · filed 1997-05-06(a)

We hold, however, that the district court applied the correct legal standard and that its conclusion about the duration of the hostile or abusive environment to which Konstantopoulos was subjected is supported by the facts. ... This court has similarly stressed that the "totality of the circumstances" must be examined, Andrews v. City of Philadelphia, 895 F.2d 1469, 1486 (3d Cir. 1990), and has "precluded an individualized, incident-by-incident approach" to making such a determination.

A woman satisfies the protected-group element of a hostile-environment sexual harassment claim under § 2000e-2(a)(1).

Brown v. City of Little Rock · filed 1997-05-12(a)(1)

In the case at bar, plaintiff Brown satisfies the first element of the prima facie case by being female.

Section 2000e-2(b) does not support a hostile work environment claim against an employment agency because it does not prohibit discrimination in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.

Riesgo v. Heidelberg Harris, Inc. · filed 1997-05-30(b)

42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-2(b) (West 1994), which catalogs the list of unlawful employment agency practices, does not bar discrimination with respect to the “terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.”

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers harassment that a reasonable employee would find severe or pervasive enough to worsen working conditions, if the employee also experienced the environment as hostile.

Torres v. Pisano · filed 1997-06-03(a)(1)

Whenever the harassment is of such quality or quantity that a reasonable employee would find the conditions of her employment altered for the worse, it is actionable under Title VII, so long as the employee subjectively experienced a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires a hostile-environment sexual-harassment plaintiff to show that the harassment was based on the employee’s sex.

McCoy v. MacOn Water Authority · filed 1997-06-16(a)

Therefore, an essential element of the prima facie case for hostile environment is that the harassment was based upon the employee’s sex.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sex-based conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile or abusive work environment.

Scannell v. Bel Air Police Department · filed 1997-06-16(a)(1)

Drawing all inferences in favor of the Plaintiff, Defendants’ alleged conduct, considering all the circumstances, may reasonably be deemed sufficiently severe and pervasive to create a hostile and abusive environment under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires an objectively hostile or abusive work environment for a hostile environment sexual harassment claim.

McKeown v. Dartmouth Bookstore · filed 1997-06-30(a)(1)

However, having reviewed plaintiff's evidence, the court finds that even the most proper of sensibilities would not have cause to find the subject posters and T-shirts created a hostile or abusive enironment.

Section 2000e-2(a) prohibits sex-based discrimination in employment, including a hostile work environment when the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions.

Stewart v. Memorial · filed 1997-07-01(a)

Considering the totality of the circumstances surrounding plaintiff's two-year employment in the EP lab as described by her (including the statements which Ozahowski admits making as well as those he denies ) , the court concludes that plaintiff was not subjected to an environment that was sufficiently hostile or permeated with discriminatory intimidation, insult, or ridicule to be actionable under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits employer liability for hostile environment sexual harassment when the employer fails to take reasonable steps to stop harassment after receiving notice.

McGuinn-Rowe v. Foster's Daily Dem. · filed 1997-07-10(a)(1)

Accordingly, defendant's apparent failure to take any reasonable steps to prevent McSweegan from continuing to harass plaintiff at work can give rise to liability. Therefore, defendant is not entitled to summary judgment to the extent that plaintiff continued to experience harassment after she complained.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sex discrimination that creates a hostile or abusive work environment through severe or pervasive conduct.

Cutright v. Metropolitan Life Insurance · filed 1997-07-11(a)(1)

In this case, Cutright’s conduct resulted in a situation where the workplace was permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule of the three female clerical employees and insult which was so severe and pervasive that it created a hostile and abusive working environment, in clear and actionable violation of Title VII of the federal statute.

Section 2000e-2 requires racial harassment to be severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions and create an abusive working environment.

Taylor v. Bakersfield City School District Dave Hashim Alice Johnson · filed 1997-07-18(a)(1)

Taylor failed to prove that she was subjected to racial harassment so severe or pervasive as to alter the conditions of her employment, and create an abusive working environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits white male employees to assert hostile environment claims based on discrimination directed at black or female coworkers.

Childress v. City of Richmond · filed 1997-08-05(a)(1)

We hold that white men have standing to assert hostile environment claims under Title VII when the discriminatory conduct is directed at blacks or females.

Section 2000e-2 requires sexual harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment for a hostile work environment claim.

Hernandez v. McDonald's Corp. · filed 1997-08-22(a)(1)

This court, in considering the totality of the circumstances and accepting all of plaintiffs allegations as true, finds that Radel’s conduct was not sufficiently pervasive or severe to alter the conditions of plaintiffs employment. Accordingly, defendant is entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs sexual harassment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) reaches sex-based workplace harassment only when it is severe or pervasive enough to make the workplace objectively hostile or abusive.

Hartsell v. Duplex Products, Inc. · filed 1997-08-25(a)(1)

Title VII is not a federal guarantee of refinement and sophistication in the work- place -- in this context, it prohibits only harassing behavior that is so severe or pervasive as to render the workplace objectively hostile or abusive.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not impose liability for a hostile work environment without discriminatory animus.

Carter v. Cornell University · filed 1997-09-04(a)(1)

However, because there is no evidence to support the notion that Mr. Del Priore’s conduct was caused by discriminatory animus, his actions do not lead to a Title VII violation.

Section 2000e-2(a) does not make occasional racial slurs actionable harassment when they do not alter the terms or conditions of employment.

Aloia v. Eastman Kokak Company · filed 1997-09-11(a)

We believe the present case is governed by Bolden. ... In any event, all things considered, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for Kodak on Aloia's claim of racial harassment.

Sex-based conduct must be severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile work environment under Title VII.

O'Shea v. Yellow Technology Services, Inc. · filed 1997-09-26(a)(1)

The court concludes that these statements and the effect of these statements were neither pervasive nor severe enough to have created an objectively hostile work environment. Accordingly, summary judgment is granted to defendant on plaintiffs Title VII and KAAD claims.

Section 2000e-2 does not support a hostile work environment claim when the timely incidents do not amount to a hostile work environment.

Dudley v. Metro-Dade County · filed 1997-10-25

In addition, those violations which were timely-filed do not, as a matter of law, rise to the level of a hostile work environment, and even if they did, the County provided a prompt, effective remedy.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim to proceed when evidence raises a factual dispute about whether the employer’s grievance procedure effectively addressed sexual harassment.

Young v. Sheetz, Inc. · filed 1997-11-21(a)(1)

The plaintiff has presented sufficient evidence as to the insufficiency of the grievance procedure of Sheetz and Fox Mountain to indicate a factual dispute which makes the matter inappropriate for summary judgment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sexual harassment when it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions and create an abusive work environment.

Spraque v. Thorn Americas, Inc. · filed 1997-11-24(a)(1)

Sprague did not proffer evidence of sexual harassment sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires evidence that an employer knew or should have known of sexual harassment and failed to take appropriate remedial action to establish employer liability for a hostile work environment.

Rose v. Baystate Medical Center, Inc. · filed 1997-11-25(a)(1)

Plaintiff can survive BMC’s summary judgment motion only if she also proffers sufficient evidence that BMC knew or should have known of the harassment and took either no, or at least inappropriate, remedial action. ... At bottom, because there is no evidence of BMC’s knowledge of Ott’s actions, even assuming those actions amounted to sexual harassment, BMC itself is entitled to summary judgment on Count I of Plaintiffs complaint.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim when sexual and other abusive comments, considered together, could show harassment based on sex.

Johnson v. Community Nursing Services · filed 1997-11-25(a)(1)

However, not all comments have to be sexual in nature. When sexual comments made prior to the existence of an alleged hostile work environment are combined with abusive comments thereafter, a reasonable jury could view the full spectrum of conduct and find that a hostile or abusive work environment existed, and that the abuse was predicated upon plaintiffs gender.

Section 2000e-2(a) permits a hostile work environment claim when sex-based harassment is severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Union Camp Corp. · filed 1997-12-02(a)

Under this theory, an employer faces liability when the work place is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter conditions of employment and create and abusive work environment. ... Applying this standard, it is clear to this Court that there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Ms. Robertson was harassed in the workplace.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sexual harassment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment.

Smith v. Northwest Financial Acceptance, Inc. · filed 1997-12-03(a)(1)

The Meritor test is a disjunctive one, requiring that the harassing conduct be sufficiently pervasive or sufficiently severe to alter the terms, conditions, or privileges of Plaintiff’s employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an actionable hostile work environment.

Stewart-Grove v. Alpha Construction Co. · filed 1997-12-19(a)(1)

Accepting all of Stewart-Grove's allegations as true, Sawyer's conduct simply did not reach the severity necessary to be actionable under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a national-origin hostile work environment claim to proceed when the evidence raises a factual issue about discrimination and the employer has not remedied the harassment.

Ochoa v. Texas Metal Trades Council · filed 1997-12-23(a)(1)

That Union Carbide did not condone the actions of its employees, or even that it investigated Ochoa’s complaints, does not change the fact that the hostile environment existed to the detriment of Union Carbide’s employees and that the company did not remedy the situation. Although the Court is not, at this stage, judging this case on its merits, the evidence as presented on summary judgment clearly establishes a fact issue as to whether Union Carbide discriminated and retaliated against Plaintiff.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a hostile work environment claim to involve treatment directed at an employee because of sex, rather than merely unpleasant workplace behavior.

Hathaway v. Runyon · filed 1997-12-29(a)(1)

Title VII does not, however, create a cause of action for all unpleasant or abusive behavior in the workplace. Rather, the plaintiff must show that the conduct was discriminatory in nature and that she was singled out for such treatment on the basis of her membership in a protected category under the statute. See, e.g., Kopp v. Samaritan Health Sys., Inc., 13 F.3d 264, 269 (8th Cir. 1993) (hostile environment plaintiff must show that harassment was based on sex); see also 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1).

Section 2000e-2(a) does not make immature, nasty, or annoying workplace conduct alone actionable as sexual harassment.

Christopher-Ketchum v. Agway Energy Products · filed 1997-12-30(a)

Second, although Ag-way may have engaged in conduct that upset Plaintiff, behavior that is immature, nasty, or annoying, without more, is not actionable as sexual harassment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits race- or religion-based harassment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an abusive working environment.

Arwood v. Cohen · filed 1998-01-07(a)(1)

A violation of Title VII occurs when the workplace is permeated with “discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult” that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment and create an abusive working environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sexual harassment that creates a hostile work environment, and sufficiently alleged offensive sexual comments can support a claim.

Matthews v. High Island Independent School District · filed 1998-01-22(a)(1)

The conduct alleged against Chiaravalloti clearly meets the threshold necessary to survive a Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). Accordingly, Plaintiff has stated a claim under Title VII for hostile work environment sexual harassment, and Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss such claims is DENIED.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires an employer facing a hostile work environment claim to take prompt remedial action when it knows or should know of sexual harassment.

Colbert v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. · filed 1998-01-30(a)

Colbert has failed to establish an actionable sexual harassment case because she has not raised a genuine issue of material fact as to the fifth element: that Georgia-Pacific knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt remedial action.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a racially hostile work environment claim when racial harassment is severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions.

Hysten v. Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners · filed 1998-02-02(a)(1)

The record contains no evidence that the dunking incident was racial in nature, or that it was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of plaintiffs employment and create an abusive working environment. Therefore, such misconduct is not actionable under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not impose employer liability for hostile work environment harassment when the employer responds adequately and effectively to a complaint.

Harris v. Electric · filed 1998-02-06(a)(1)

Lincoln’s response to Harris’ allegations of sexual harassment was not one of indifference. The company’s actions were responsive to Harris and demonstrated that the company would not permit sexual harassment in the work place. For the foregoing reasons, Lincoln is entitled to summary judgment on Harris’ Title VII claim of sexual harassment.

An employer avoids liability for a sexually hostile work environment when it promptly takes corrective measures that effectively end the harassment.

Reinhold v. Commonwealth of Virginia Virginia School for the Deaf and Blind · filed 1998-02-06(a)(1)

Because VSDB's corrective measures were taken promptly and effectively ended the sexual harassment, VSDB cannot be held liable under Title VII as an employer for the hostile work environment created by Martin.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires workplace harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment; isolated, minor incidents do not qualify.

Lucas v. South Nassau Communities Hospital · filed 1998-02-23(a)(1)

The isolated incidents that arose within the 300 day time period do not satisfy the minimal legal requirements of a sexual discrimination claim, thus requiring plaintiffs cause of action under Title VII to be dismissed.

An employer’s liability for a hostile work environment requires proof that it knew or should have known of the harassment.

King v. FINISH LINE, INC. · filed 1998-03-05(a)(1)

For an employer to be liable under a hostile work environment claim, the plaintiff essentially must first show that the employer knew or should have known of the existence of harassment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim to reach a jury when a supervisor’s conduct, considered together, could establish abusive working conditions because of sex.

Delaria v. American General Finance, Inc. · filed 1998-03-12(a)(1)

Taken together, Bartow’s behavior culminating in her dismissal could lead a rational jury to conclude that DeLaria’s work environment was hostile and abusive and that but for' her being a woman it would not have been so.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sex-based harassment that creates a hostile work environment; conduct need not be explicitly sexual to count.

Mary Jane HATHAWAY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Marvin RUNYON, Postmaster General, Defendant—Appellee · filed 1998-03-12(a)(1)

Not every aspect of a work environment characterized by hostility and intimidation need be explicitly sexual in nature to be probative.

An employer is liable for a coworker’s hostile work environment only if it provided no reasonable avenue for complaint or knew of the harassment but did nothing about it.

Gutierrez v. Henoch · filed 1998-03-24(a)(1)

Gutierrez also failed utterly to satisfy the second prong of a hostile environment claim — that the harasser’s conduct is imputable to Henoch. As discussed above, Mr. Gelpi is properly characterized as Gutierrez’s co-worker, not her supervisor. Under these circumstances, Henoch cannot be held liable unless Henoch “provided no reasonable avenue for complaint or knew of the harassment but did nothing about it.”

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires workplace harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions; isolated, innocuous incidents do not establish a hostile work environment.

Michael B. Fernando, M.D. v. Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's, Medical Center · filed 1998-03-27(a)(1)

Even if we were to assume that the complained-of comments were related to race, the district court did not err in finding that the incidents were too few in number, too infrequent, and too innocuous to create a hostile work environment. Isolated and innocuous incidents of discrimination are insufficient to support a hostile environment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers a hostile work environment based on sex even when the hostile comments are not sexual in nature.

King v. Auto, Truck, Industrial Parts & Supply Inc. · filed 1998-03-28(a)(1)

The repeated comments made to Drivers, although not always sexual in nature, clearly illustrated the workplace hostility felt only by the female employees at ATI (doc. 63, exhs. A:13-14; B:18, 46-47, 88).

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers racial harassment that affects an employee’s working conditions.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Michael Hospital of Franciscan Sisters, Milwaukee, Inc. · filed 1998-03-31(a)(1)

In the end, the text of Title VII provides the best guidance. It forbids discrimination in the “terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l). St. Michael’s motion with regard to the hostile environment claim asks the court to find as a matter of law that the undisputed facts demonstrate that no harassment took place that could have affected the conditions Johnson worked under while at St. Michael. Based on the foregoing, the court cannot grant this request.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) makes racial harassment actionable when it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an abusive work environment.

Bonner v. Payless Shoe Source · filed 1998-04-14(a)(1)

Second, the conduct he alleges was not severe or pervasive enough to support his claim that he worked in an objectively hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires a hostile work environment claimant to show that the alleged hostility was based on sex.

Phillips v. Merchants Insurance Group · filed 1998-04-21(a)

Even if Plaintiff is successful in proving that the work environment was hostile, he does not allege sufficient facts to show that it was hostile based on his gender.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim when harassment of other employees makes the plaintiff’s own workplace hostile, even if the plaintiff was not personally harassed.

Leibovitz v. New York City Transit Authority · filed 1998-05-05(a)(1)

Personal harassment is not the gravamen of a hostile work environment claim. To assume that a cause of action for hostile work environment excludes claims where the environment is hostile but the person complaining about the environment has not been personally attacked would make quid pro quo and hostile work environment virtually identical while unnecessarily restricting the layman’s definition of “environment.”

Section 2000e-2(a) does not require an employee to leave or want to leave an otherwise desirable job to bring a hostile work environment claim.

Davis v. United States Postal Service · filed 1998-05-06(a)

The trial court’s implicit conclusion — that a plaintiff who otherwise enjoys her work, is successful, and testifies that she hopes to continue that employment cannot as a matter of law “subjectively perceive the [work] environment to be abusive,” Harris, 510 U.S. at 21 — is erroneous.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim when sex-based harassment is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment.

Provencher v. CVS Pharmacy · filed 1998-05-26(a)(1)

A plaintiff can prevail on a hostile work environment sexual harassment claim only if he establishes that the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a plaintiff claiming coworker harassment to show that the employer knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt remedial action.

Miller v. Rowan Companies, Inc. · filed 1998-05-29(a)(1)

This court holds that this is prompt, remedial action. Accordingly, plaintiffs racially hostile work environment claim fails for want of prima facie proof on this factor.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not make racial remarks actionable as harassment when they are not motivated by the plaintiff’s race.

Kortan v. State of Cal. · filed 1998-05-07(a)(1)

Insensitive and boorish remarks not motivated by the plaintiffs race are not actionable under Title VII. No rational trier of fact could find for Kortan on this element and so the claim for racial harassment cannot go forward.

A hostile-work-environment claim can proceed when the evidence creates a factual dispute over whether the harassment occurred because of the employee’s sex.

Lauro v. Tomkats, Inc. · filed 1998-06-18(a)(1)

Accordingly, the Court concludes that there is a disputed issue of fact as to whether Lauro was subjected to a hostile environment because of her sex.

Unfulfilled sexual threats by a supervisor are evaluated as a hostile work environment claim under § 2000e-2(a)(1) and require severe or pervasive conduct.

Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth · filed 1998-06-26(a)(1)

Because Ellerth’s claim involves only unfulfilled threats, it should be categorized as a hostile work environment claim which requires a showing of severe or pervasive conduct.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires evidence connecting an abusive work environment to the employee’s sex.

Nancy R. SWEENEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Togo D. WEST, Jr., Secretary, Dept. of the Army, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1998-06-29(a)

More fundamentally, even if we assumed that Sweeney experienced hostility capable of altering her working conditions and making her work environment abusive, we search the record in vain for anything tying that (mis)treatment to her sex.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) allows a hostile work environment sexual harassment claim to proceed when the evidence raises a genuine dispute about whether the conduct was severe enough to alter working conditions.

Smiley v. Jekyll Island State Park Authority · filed 1998-07-02(a)(1)

Plaintiff has adduced sufficient evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Jeffries’ behavior was so egregious as to constitute a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a) permits a hostile work environment claim when an employer knows of sexual harassment and fails to take prompt remedial action.

Howard v. Burns Bros. Inc. · filed 1998-07-14(a)

Howard therefore made a submissible case that Burns Brothers management knew of Daake's conduct, but failed to put a stop to it promptly.

Section 2000e-2(a) prohibits a sexually hostile work environment when harassment alters employment conditions and management knows of it but fails to act promptly.

Howard v. Burns Bros. · filed 1998-07-14(a)

We therefore conclude that Howard made a sufficient showing of abusive conduct to support the jury's verdict in her favor. ... Howard therefore made a submissible case that Burns Brothers management knew of Daake's conduct, but failed to put a stop to it promptly.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sex-based harassment that creates a hostile work environment; whether a supervisor’s conduct meets that standard can be a jury question.

Rorie v. United Parcel Serv. · filed 1998-07-23(a)(1)

While we concede that the facts of this case are on the borderline of those sufficient to support a claim of sexual harassment, we cannot say that a supervisor who pats a female employee on the back, brushes up against her, and tells her she smells good does not constitute sexual harassment as a matter of law.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires hostile work environment harassment to be because of sex and sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions.

Romero v. Caribbean Restaurants, Inc. · filed 1998-07-31(a)(1)

In summary, plaintiff fails to present an actionable hostile environment claim under Title VII because he has not shown that any behavior directed towards him by his supervisor was done so because of his sex or was severe and pervasive enough to sustain a claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers hostile work environment sexual harassment when the conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment.

Cadena v. Pacesetter Corp. · filed 1998-08-06(a)(1)

The Court finds that plaintiff presented facts from which a jury might reasonably find that the harassment was pervasive.

A sexual harassment claim under § 2000e-2(a)(1) may reach a jury when disputed facts could show severe or pervasive conduct creating a hostile work environment.

Henderson v. Whirlpool Corp. · filed 1998-08-13(a)(1)

The Court finds that there are disputed issues of material fact as to whether the alleged conduct was so severe or pervasive as to create a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers a sexually hostile work environment when the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment.

Lewis v. Simmons Airlines, Inc. · filed 1998-08-18(a)(1)

Plaintiff testified that, after that date, Gorham called her an “idiot” and “Marlena,” Gorham told her she should not bend over like that, and Gorham yelled at her after she accused him of intimidation and harassment. This conduct is not enough to establish severe and pervasive conduct amounting to a hostile environment under the applicable Supreme Court and Seventh Circuit precedent.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires evidence of discriminatory motive to establish a hostile work environment claim.

Buwana v. Department of Higher Education · filed 1998-08-20(a)(1)

The Plaintiff does not meet his burden of sufficiently establishing discriminatory motive behind the conduct. Therefore, Dean Bever’s conduct does not fall within the pervasive prong of the hostile work environment test.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sex-based harassment that creates a pervasively hostile work environment and unreasonably interferes with an employee’s work.

Pollard v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours, Inc. · filed 1998-08-20(a)(1)

Based on the evidence set forth above, the Court concludes that harassment faced by plaintiff while she was on the “A” shift at DuPont, and specifically during the December 1994 through December of 1995 period relevant to liability in this case, constituted a pervasively hostile environment and unreasonably interfered with her work performance.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) makes racial harassment actionable when it creates a hostile work environment by altering the conditions of employment.

Brown v. MD National Capital · filed 1998-08-25(a)(1)

Racial harass- ment that creates a hostile work environment is actionable under Title VII because it amounts to discrimination in the conditions of employ- ment. ... The conduct at issue was neither frequent nor severe. We therefore agree with the district court that summary judg- ment was appropriate as to Brown's hostile work environment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) allows a hostile work environment claim to reach a jury when a supervisor’s conduct could constitute sex-based harassment.

Lisa A. RORIE, Appellant, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Appellee · filed 1998-09-04(a)(1)

Title VII prohibits an employer from discriminating “against any individual with respect to [her] compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment” on the basis of her gender. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1). ... While we concede that the facts of this ease are on the borderline of those sufficient to support a claim of sexual harassment, we cannot say that a supervisor who pats a female employee on the back, brushes up against her, and tells her she smells good does not constitute sexual harassment as a matter of law. Recognizing that the September 1995 conversation falls outside of the 180-day period, we believe that, at the very least, McFadden’s comments suggest that his later behavior presents a jury question as to hostile environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires harassment to be severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment before it creates a hostile work environment.

Warg v. Reno · filed 1998-09-10(a)(1)

On the record submitted, the Court does not find any version of Agent Kroner’s conversation with the plaintiff on June 30, 1996, severe or pervasive enough to establish liability under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a hostile work environment to be objectively severe or pervasive and subjectively perceived as abusive.

Merriweather v. Alabama Department of Public Safety · filed 1998-09-14(a)(1)

This fourth element contains both subjective and objective components. To be actionable, the conduct must be “severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment— an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive,” and that the victim must “subjectively perceive the environment to be abusive.”

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits courts to consider conduct not motivated by the plaintiff’s sex as context when evaluating a hostile work environment claim.

Penry v. Federal Home Loan Bank of Topeka · filed 1998-09-15(a)(1)

Even where the motive behind the alleged conduct was not the plaintiff’s gender, the court may still consider that conduct relevant when evaluating whether ambiguous conduct was in fact gender-motivated or whether gender-motivated conduct was so severe and pervasive as to create Title VII liability.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires racial harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment.

Fortenberry v. United Airlines · filed 1998-09-30(a)(1)

Thus, McRoberts’ conduct on June 22, 1995 fails to exhibit the frequency or severity of discriminatory conduct required under Title VII to sustain an actionable claim for harassment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires harassment to be objectively severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment.

Pfullman v. Texas Department of Transportation · filed 1998-10-16(a)(1)

50. Even viewed together, the three incidents are insufficient to create an objectively hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment; the isolated conduct alleged here did not meet that standard.

Gardner v. Tripp County, SD · filed 1998-10-28(a)(1)

Thus, with respect to the isolated incident on June 29, 1995, when plaintiff was slapped on the buttocks by Olson, in addition to the other evidence plaintiff cites, the Court agrees with defendants that such conduct is insufficient as a matter of law to create a hostile work environment under Title VII sexual harassment law.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a supervisor-harassment claimant to show unwelcome conduct based on sex that is severe or pervasive enough to create a discriminatorily abusive working environment, plus a basis for holding the employer liable.

Mendoza v. Borden, Inc. · filed 1998-10-28(a)(1)

To establish a hostile-environment sexual-harassment claim under Title VII based on harassment by a supervisor, an employee must show: (1) that he or she belongs to a protected group; (2) that the employee has been subject to unwelcome sexual harassment, such as sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other conduct of a sexual nature; (3) that the harassment must have been based on the sex of the employee; (4) that the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of employment and create a discriminatorily abusive working environment; and (5) a basis for holding the employer liable.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sexual harassment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter an employee’s working conditions.

Stephanie J. QUINN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GREEN TREE CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1998-11-05(a)(1)

Though the two incidents in question — Fahey’s comment, apparently regarding Quinn’s posterior, and his use of papers held in his hand to touch her breasts — are obviously offensive and inappropriate, they are sufficiently isolated and discrete that a trier of fact could not reasonably conclude that they pervaded Quinn’s work environment. Nor are these incidents, together or separately, of sufficient severity to alter the conditions of Quinn’s employment without regard to frequency or regularity.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires alleged gender-based harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment for a hostile work environment claim.

Houck v. City of Prairie · filed 1998-11-13(a)(1)

Having reviewed the record, we hold that the instances of which plaintiff complains were not sufficiently pervasive or severe to alter the conditions of plaintiff’s employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a hostile work environment to be objectively hostile or abusive; the occasional anonymous letters sent to these employees’ homes did not meet that standard.

Rose Butler Erma Gracia v. Ysleta Independent School District · filed 1998-11-16(a)(1)

While the letters the plaintiffs received were undoubtedly immature and inappropriate, and while some of the letters had a sexual content, a consideration of all the circumstances does not permit the conclusion that the letters created a hostile or abusive environment at the workplace.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sexual conduct to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an objectively hostile work environment.

Armstrong v. Meijer, Inc. · filed 1998-12-17(a)(1)

Considered under an objective standard, however, the conduct was not sufficiently severe or pervasive to support a hostile environment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a hostile work environment claimant to show that the alleged harassment was based on sex and was sufficiently severe or pervasive.

Boothe v. Henderson · filed 1998-12-18(a)(1)

Nevertheless, Boothe has failed to show that these allegations were based on her sex or that the allegations were sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a claim for hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim to reach a jury when ongoing sexual remarks could be found sufficiently pervasive.

Gail E. ABEITA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRANSAMERICA MAILINGS, INC., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees · filed 1998-12-23(a)(1)

For these reasons, we cannot say that plaintiff is unable to present sufficient evidence of a hostile environment to submit her claim to the fact finder. We reverse the District Court’s grant of summary judgment on plaintiffs hostile environment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not treat an employee’s assignment near a coworker as an objectively hostile work environment when the coworker’s prior conduct did not constitute harassment.

Indira ADUSUMILLI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1998-12-28(a)(1)

However, in this case, as discussed above, Gray did not engage in harassment, let alone “particularly severe or pervasive harassment.” Therefore, as a matter of law, the City’s actions in assigning Gray to work near Adusumilli did not create an objectively hostile environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a hostile-work-environment plaintiff to show that the alleged harassment was based on sex.

Blevins v. Heilig-Meyers Corp. · filed 1998-12-30(a)(1)

The court finds that Blevins has not established a prima-facie case, however, because she failed to show that the complained-of harassment was based on sex.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a sexual harassment claim to reach a jury when a supervisor’s continuous conduct could have altered an employee’s working conditions.

Breeding v. Gallagher · filed 1999-01-15(a)(1)

Accordingly, we respectfully conclude that the district court erred by granting summary judgment on Ms. Breeding's sexual harassment hostile environment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an abusive working environment.

Shabica v. Engineering Sales · filed 1999-01-19(a)(1)

The one incident of harassment cited by Shabica was not sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an abu- sive working environment.

Section 2000e-2(a) makes racial harassment actionable when it creates a hostile work environment by discriminating in the conditions of employment.

Settle v. Baltimore County · filed 1999-01-20(a)

Thus, racial harassment that creates a hostile work environment is actionable under Title VII because it amounts to discrimination in the conditions of employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) allows a hostile work environment claim when a plaintiff adequately alleges sexual harassment and facts supporting employer liability.

Galloway v. Matagorda County, Texas · filed 1999-02-17(a)(1)

Plaintiff has thus properly alleged the elements of a prima facie sexual harassment claim based on the actions of Sgt. Jordan and the elements necessary to establish employer liability. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has stated a claim upon which relief may be granted with respect to her allegations of hostile environment and constructive discharge under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) allows courts to consider the cumulative effect of racial and religious harassment when assessing a hostile work environment.

Van M. Hafford v. Larry Seidner, Warden, Lorain Correctional Institution, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correcti · filed 1999-02-19(a)(1)

The theory of a hostile-environment claim is that the cumulative effect of ongoing harassment is abusive. It would not be right to require a judgment against Hafford if the sum of all of the harassment he experienced was abusive, but the incidents could be separated into several categories, with no one category containing enough incidents to amount to “pervasive” harassment.

An employer seeking summary judgment on a supervisor harassment claim must establish that it reasonably prevented and corrected sexual harassment and that the employee unreasonably failed to use available remedies.

Powell v. Morris · filed 1999-03-05(a)(1)

There is simply not enough evidence at this point for the Court to conclude that ODRC exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct sexual harassment, or that Plaintiff was unreasonable in failing to employ such procedures. For Defendants to prevail on this affirmative defense, they must adduce such evidence at trial. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs Title VII sexually hostile work environment claim with regard to her supervisors is, therefore, DENIED.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim when a supervisor’s repeated, disparate treatment could establish abusive working conditions based on race.

Copeland v. Rosen · filed 1999-03-09(a)(1)

The Court finds a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Rosen created an environment abusive to plaintiff because he is a black man. Construing the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff, Rosen engaged in an on-going campaign during 1992 and 1993 of harassing plaintiff by repeatedly subjecting him to false criticism and holding him to a different performance standard than non-black male teachers.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sexual harassment to affect a term, condition, or privilege of employment to support a hostile work environment claim.

Debra Jean SHEPHERD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS OF the STATE of TEXAS, Defendant-Appelle · filed 1999-03-16(a)(1)

Viewing the harassment in light of existing caselaw, we hold that Shepherd has not raised a genuine issue that the harassment affected a “term, condition, or privilege” of employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a hostile work environment claimant to show that the harassment was due to race; unpleasant treatment alone does not suffice.

Shoate v. USPS · filed 1999-03-26(a)(1)

Therefore, we agree with the district court that the nature of plaintiff’s working environment, no matter how unpleasant and demeaning, was not due to her race.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires workplace harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to support a hostile work environment claim.

Meckenberg v. New York City Off-Track Betting · filed 1999-04-13(a)

The harassment alleged by Meekenberg simply fails to rise to the level of severity or pervasiveness necessary for a successful hostile environment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) allows a hostile work environment claim to proceed when evidence could show race- or sex-based harassment severe or pervasive enough to alter working conditions.

Carter v. Chrysler Corp. · filed 1999-04-20(a)(1)

Carter produced evidence from which a factfinder could reasonably conclude that she experienced a hostile work environment motivated by her sex or race. ... Given this showing, Carter produced enough to avoid summary judgment because on such a record a factfinder could find the harassment sufficiently severe or pervasive to create liability under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sex-based conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment.

Andree J. LEOPOLD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BACCARAT, INC., Defendant-Appellee · filed 1999-04-20(a)(1)

Second, however benign the mere use of the word “sexy” might seem, its incorporation into a threat of employment termination could reasonably be viewed as a form of discriminatory intimidation. ... We believe that, taken together, such findings could reasonably lead to a conclusion that Watts engaged in discriminatory conduct that was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of Leopold’s employment and create an abusive working environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not make a supervisor’s hand caress and intrusive personal questions actionable sexual harassment when those acts, standing alone, do not create a hostile work environment.

Thomas v. Henderson · filed 1999-04-27(a)(1)

Returning to the present case, the Court initially notes that, standing alone, Plaintiffs allegations that Mr. Young caressed her hand while playing cat-and-mouse with her time card, and that he asked intrusive questions about her perfume, family and personal problems fall outside the purview of Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a) covers a hostile work environment when discriminatory conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter working conditions.

Osier v. Broome County · filed 1999-05-11(a)

The Court, therefore, finds that no fair minded jury could reasonably conclude that plaintiff endured a work environment sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter her working conditions thereby constituting a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) reaches sexual harassment when it is severe or pervasive enough to create an abusive working environment.

Shaver v. Dixie Trucking · filed 1999-05-21(a)(1)

This Court believes that Finley's con- duct was not so severe or pervasive that it created an abusive working environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sexual harassment to be severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions for a hostile work environment claim.

Pesso v. General · filed 1999-05-24(a)(1)

We can- not conclude that these comments subjected Pesso to sexually hostile working conditions which altered the terms and conditions of his employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sex-based harassment to be severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment.

Unrein v. Payless Shoesource, Inc. · filed 1999-06-03(a)(1)

The court does not find that the incidents noted by the plaintiff are either severe or pervasive enough to constitute a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) allows a sex-based hostile work environment claim to proceed when a jury could find the harassment sufficiently pervasive to create an abusive workplace.

Newtown v. Shell Oil Co. · filed 1999-06-08(a)(1)

Drawing all reasonable inferences in plaintiffs favor and looking at the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable jury could find that the discriminatory conduct was sufficiently pervasive to create a hostile or abusive work environment. Thus, a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether the conduct occurred with sufficient regularity to be viewed as pervasive or permeating the workplace with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, or insult. For this reason, summary judgment on the hostile work environment claim is inappropriate, and is denied.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) reaches sexual harassment that creates a hostile work environment; repeated sexual comments and gestures can raise a genuine factual dispute about workplace hostility.

Franklin v. King Lincoln-Mercury-Suzuki, Inc. · filed 1999-06-16(a)(1)

Thus, the Court finds that Franklin has created a genuine dispute of material fact with regard to the alleged sexual harassment creating a hostile work environment for her.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires racial harassment to be severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile work environment.

Arroyo v. Westlb Administration, Inc. · filed 1999-06-16(a)(1)

Given the number of incidents involved, the significant gaps of time separating each incident, the nature of the comments, that they were made by a peer and that the Bank promptly responded to Arroyo’s complaints, the Court finds that these incidents were neither severe nor pervasive enough to have created an objectively hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers racial harassment when the workplace is objectively hostile enough to worsen working conditions and the conduct can be imputed to the employer.

Richardson v. New York State Department of Correctional Service, Auburn Correctional Facility · filed 1999-06-16(a)(1)

Here, Richardson proceeds under a “hostile work environment” theory, which requires her to establish (1) that the “workplace was permeated with discriminatory intimidation that was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [her] work environment, and (2) that a specific basis exists for imputing the conduct that created the hostile environment to the employer.”

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) allows a race-based hostile work environment claim to reach a jury when racial slurs and physical threats significantly affect an employee’s work.

Van M. Hafford v. Larry Seidner, Warden, Lorain Correctional Institution, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correcti · filed 1999-07-12(a)(1)

The evidence of a racially hostile work environment significantly affecting Hafford’s ability to perform his job is sufficient to warrant consideration by a jury. According to this evidence, Hafford’s supervisors and fellow correction officers engaged in a pattern of racial harassment consisting of not only racial slurs, but also physical threats.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) makes hostile environment sexual harassment actionable as sex discrimination.

Smith v. Raleigh District of the North Carolina Conference of the United Methodist Church · filed 1999-07-27(a)(1)

Claims of hostile environment sexual harassment constitute a form of sex discrimination actionable under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a) covers a hostile work environment when sexual harassment is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment.

Desmarteau v. City of Wichita, Kan. · filed 1999-08-12(a)

A reasonable jury could find from the evidence cited that Williamson’s conduct was sufficiently severe and pervasive to constitute sex discrimination.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim based on sex even when some of the alleged harassment includes taunts about homosexuality.

Schmedding v. Tnemec Co. · filed 1999-08-19(a)(1)

We do not think that, simply because some of the harassment alleged by Schmedding includes taunts of being homosexual or other epithets connoting homosexuality, the complaint is thereby transformed from one alleging harassment based on sex to one alleging harassment based on sexual orientation.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim based on a single severe incident of sex-based harassment.

Smith v. Sheahan · filed 1999-08-27(a)(1)

A jury would also be entitled to conclude that the assault Smith suffered was severe enough to alter the terms of her employment even though it was a single incident.

A hostile work environment claim requires evidence that the harassment occurred because of the employee’s sex; the sexes of the people involved alone do not establish that link.

Bergeron v. SW LA Hosp Assn · filed 1999-09-01(a)(1)

A mere difference in the sex of an alleged sexual harasser and sexual harassee is insufficient, by itself, to raise an inference of sexual harassment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) makes sexual harassment actionable when it is severe or pervasive enough to create an abusive working environment.

Ellis v. Director CIA · filed 1999-09-10(a)(1)

Ellis' allegations, assuming they are true, are simply insufficient to satisfy the requirement that the harassment be so severe or pervasive as to create an abusive working environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires harassment to be severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment.

Anderson v. Memphis City Schools Board of Education · filed 1999-09-14(a)(1)

Because the conduct here was not frequent or severe, was not physically threatening or humiliating, and did not unreasonably interfere with plaintiffs work performance, no rational trier of fact could find that plaintiff was subjected to a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2 permits a hostile work environment instruction that conveys the severe or pervasive standard without using those exact words.

Pavon v. Swift Transportation Co., Inc., an Arizona Corporation · filed 1999-09-20

While the court did not use the precise formulation Swift asked for, the instructions it did give amounted to the same thing. The jury had to find that the conduct at issue was “unwelcome, pervasive and regular” and involved “discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, insult,” and “detrimentally affected” plaintiff, which would suggest that it was “severe” and so by definition altered the conditions of employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires alleged harassment by multiple individuals to be considered together when evaluating a hostile work environment claim.

Gordon v. Southern Bells, Inc. · filed 1999-09-30(a)(1)

Therefore, we look at all of the alleged conduct, that occurring at the hands of Brown as well as of Ash-Simpson, in evaluating Gordon’s claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires courts to consider harassment by all perpetrators together when deciding whether a hostile work environment existed.

Marilyn H. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1999-09-30(a)(1)

However, the totality-of-the-circumstances test mandates that district courts consider harassment by all perpetrators combined when analyzing whether a plaintiff has alleged the existence of a hostile work environment, the fourth element of a hostile-work-environment claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not make an isolated offensive incident actionable as a hostile work environment when it is neither sufficiently severe nor pervasive.

Cruz v. Radtec, Inc. · filed 1999-09-30(a)(1)

It is clear to the Court that plaintiff has failed to state an actionable claim of sexual harassment for a hostile work environment. Courts have clearly held that a single offensive incident, such as the one claimed by plaintiff, will be insufficient to establish that a plaintiff was subjected to a hostile work environment. Colon’s conduct was clearly deplorable; however, it is undisputed that this incident was an isolated one in plaintiffs eight years as an employee at Radtec.

An employer’s adequate remedial action can defeat a hostile work environment claim.

Henderson v. Heartland Press, Inc. · filed 1999-10-13(a)

Heartland took adequate remedial action as a matter of law. Therefore, Henderson cannot prove the fifth required element for an actionable .hostile work environment claim. Heartland is granted summary judgment on this issue.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires hostile work environment sexual harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter working conditions and to be based on the employee’s sex.

Temple v. Auto Banc of Kansas, Inc. · filed 1999-11-02(a)(1)

Specifically, plaintiff has failed to come forward with evidence of sexual harassment sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive working environment. Moreover, the record does not support a finding that the conduct at issue was based on plaintiffs sex. Accordingly, the court grants defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment on this claim.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sexual harassment to create a hostile or abusive working atmosphere to support a hostile work environment claim.

Cross v. Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees · filed 2000-01-04(a)(1)

Even if Cross could successfully show that Vietzen’s conduct toward him was motivated by the fact that Cross was male, he cannot show that the conduct created a hostile or abusive working atmosphere, as required to prove a Title VII violation.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sexual harassment that is severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions and create a hostile work environment.

Dyke v. McCleave · filed 2000-01-14(a)(1)

After carefully reviewing the evidence submitted by the parties in connection with Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, including deposition and affidavit testimony, the Court finds that a reasonable juror could infer that the quality and quantity of the comments and events in question were sufficiently severe and pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of Plaintiffs employment for the worse and create a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a hostile work environment claim based on gender-based harassment even without sexual advances.

Smith v. First Union National · filed 2000-01-19(a)(1)

The district court failed to recognize that a woman's work environ- ment can be hostile even if she is not subjected to sexual advances or propositions.

Section 2000e-2 requires evidence of racially motivated conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions and create an abusive atmosphere for a hostile work environment claim.

Settle v. Baltimore County · filed 2000-01-24

With respect to the hostile environment claim, the court rea- soned that Settle failed to proffer sufficient evidence that the incidents he cited to support the claim were racially motivated or were "suffi- ciently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive atmosphere."2 Causey v. Balog, 162 F.3d 795, 801 (4th Cir. 1998). ... After reviewing the parties' briefs and the applicable law, and hav- ing had the benefit of oral argument, we conclude that the district court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

A racial hostile work environment claim requires sufficient evidence that the incidents were racially motivated and severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions and create an abusive atmosphere.

Harris v. Baltimore County · filed 2000-01-24

With respect to the hostile environment claim, the court reasoned that Harris failed to proffer sufficient evidence that the incidents he cited to support the claim were racially motivated or were"sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive atmosphere."3 Causey v. Balog, 162 F.3d 795, 801 (4th Cir. 1998). ... After reviewing the parties' briefs and the applicable law, and hav- ing had the benefit of oral argument, we conclude that the district court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of Baltimore County. Accordingly, we affirm.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sexual harassment when the conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions and create a hostile or abusive work environment.

Burnett v. Tyco Corp · filed 2000-02-11(a)(1)

However, under the totality of the circumstances, a single battery coupled with two merely offensive remarks over a six-month period does not create an issue of material fact as to whether the conduct alleged was sufficiently severe to create a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires a hostile work environment to be motivated by sex or another protected status.

Heuer v. Weil-Mclain, a Division of the Marley Company · filed 2000-02-18(a)

But Title VII does not impose liability on an employer for creating or condoning a hostile working environment unless the hostility is motivated by race, gender, or some other status that the statute protects.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sexual harassment to be severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment when no tangible employment action occurs.

Morris v. Oldham County Fiscal Court John W. Black, County Judge/executive Brent Likins · filed 2000-03-03(a)(1)

We hold that, under these facts, Morris cannot establish that she was subjected to a hostile working environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits a sex-based hostile work environment claim to proceed when evidence could show that the harassment was based on sex and altered employment conditions.

Plotner v. Swanton Local Board of Education · filed 2000-03-09(a)(1)

That constitutes sufficient evidence from which a jury could find that Knisley’s conduct was based on Plotner’s sex. ... On that evidence, a reasonable jury could find that the harassment objectively altered the conditions of Plotner’s employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers sexual harassment sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions, including harassment by coworkers that can be imputed to the employer.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Federal Express Corp. · filed 2000-03-09(a)(1)

Based on the above, this Court finds that the alleged conduct was sufficiently pervasive, persistent and severe to alter the conditions of her employment. ... Thus, this Court finds that the facts plead provide a reasonable basis upon which the alleged discriminatory behavior may be imputed to Federal Express.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sexual harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment.

Burnett v. Tyco Corporation and Grinnell Corporation · filed 2000-03-24(a)(1)

However, under the totality of the circumstances, a single battery coupled with two merely offensive remarks over a six- month period does not create an issue of material fact as to whether the conduct alleged was sufficiently severe to create a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) covers a hostile work environment when discriminatory conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions.

Wahlstrom v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad · filed 2000-04-06(a)(1)

To establish the existence of a hostile work environment, plaintiff must show that “[her] workplace [was] permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that [was] sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [her] employment.”

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment.

Shepard v. Frontier Communications Services, Inc. · filed 2000-04-10(a)(1)

Zufall’s conduct, while perhaps annoying and inappropriate, was not sufficiently egregious or sexual in nature to create a hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) treats harassment that creates a hostile work environment as discrimination in the conditions of employment.

Sharafeldin v. Maryland, Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services · filed 2000-04-10(a)(1)

Harassment which creates a hostile work environment is actionable under Title VII because it amounts to discrimination in the conditions of employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires a hostile work environment to be severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment.

Tutton v. ABC Supply · filed 2000-04-12(a)(1)

However, the indignities she suffered were episodic and ambiguous and thus not sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires workplace harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions for a hostile work environment claim.

Caro v. Miami-Dade County · filed 2000-04-12(a)(1)

Plaintiff was offended by each of these statements, but taken as a whole, a reasonable person could not find that these instances are sufficiently “severe” or “pervasive” to sustain a charge of racial discrimination.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not require a plaintiff alleging a sex-based hostile work environment to prove the harassers’ motives or show that their conduct involved sexual advances.

Bailey v. Henderson · filed 2000-04-20(a)(1)

There is not, however, a requirement that Bailey demonstrate the “motives” of her antagonists or that the conduct to which she was subjected was “sexual or romantic come-ons.”

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sex-based harassment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an abusive working environment.

Harris v. Franklin-Williamson Human Services, Inc. · filed 2000-05-11(a)(1)

While the Court does not condone Philip’s conduct, the Court does not find that it rises to a level of hostile work environment under the Seventh Circuit.

Section 2000e-2(a) requires a hostile work environment to be objectively severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment.

Gupta v. Florida Board of Regents · filed 2000-05-17(a)

However, the evidence presented at trial does not support a finding that from an objective viewpoint the alleged sexual harassment was so frequent, severe, or pervasive to constitute actionable sexual harassment under Title VII.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) does not cover workplace harassment inflicted regardless of sex.

Wieland v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP., STATE OF IND. · filed 2000-05-19(a)(1)

Because Title VII is premised on eliminating discrimination, inappropriate conduct that is inflicted on both sexes, or is inflicted regardless of sex, is outside the statute’s ambit.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) requires sexual harassment to be sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment before it supports a hostile work environment claim.

Brooks v. City of San Mateo · filed 2000-06-05(a)(1)

The conduct here, while very offensive, does not rise to the level of harassment for which Title VII offers a remedy.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) makes an employer liable for a hostile work environment when it knows of coworker sexual harassment and fails to take proper remedial action.

Henderson v. Simmons Foods, Inc. · filed 2000-06-16(a)(1)

In fact, when viewed as a whole, it is quite clear that Simmons failed to remedy the hostile environment it allowed Sanchez to create. Accordingly, Simmons's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence regarding the hostile work environment claim fails.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) can impose liability for a hostile work environment when sexual harassment is severe and the employer responds negligently.

Hostetler, Ann M. v. Quality Dining Inc · filed 2000-06-29(a)(1)

Although a finder of fact might reach the same conclusions after a trial, we do not believe it appropriate to hold, as a matter of law, that the alleged harassment was not severe or that her employer’s response was non-negligent.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits consideration of post-interview, pre-employment conduct when assessing whether sexual harassment created a hostile work environment.

Morales-Evans v. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF NJ · filed 2000-06-30(a)(1)

Accordingly, evidence of post-interview, pre-employment incidents between Coleman and Evans may be considered in assessing whether Coleman created a hostile or abusive environment.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) permits evidence of post-interview, pre-employment harassment to be considered in a hostile work environment claim.

Morales-Evans v. Administrative Office of Courts of State of New Jersey · filed 2000-06-30(a)(1)

This Court has not uncovered any precedent deciding whether evidence of post-interview but pre-employment harassment may be considered as part of a prima facie case. In the absence of any authority to the contrary, this Court finds that such evidence is relevant and may be considered in the hostile environment inquiry.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sex discrimination in employment, including sexual harassment that creates a hostile work environment.

Newsome v. Administrative Office of the Courts of New Jersey · filed 2000-07-05(a)(1)

Drawing those inferences, this Court concludes that a reasonable juror could find that Coleman’s actions were sufficiently “regular and pervasive” or “severe or pervasive” to create a hostile or abusive work environment. Newsome has thus made a prima facie case of sexual harassment under both Title VII and the LAD.

Section 2000e-2(a)(1) prohibits sexual harassment that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions and create an abusive work environment.

Kortan v. California Youth Authority Albert Atesalp I.R. Schulman Manual Carbajal · filed 2000-07-07(a)(1)

Considering all the circumstances, including the fact that Atesalp's offensive conduct was concentrated on one occasion, and that it occurred in the wake of a dispute about a nurse's failure to follow instructions and Kortan's telling Atesalp that she would no longer serve as "acting senior psychologist " in his absence, we conclude that no triable issue exists about whether the conduct was frequent, severe or abusive enough to interfere unreasonably with Kortan's employment.

Section 2000e-2 covers unwelcome sexual conduct that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter employment conditions and create an abusive working environment.

Joanne Fielder v. Ual Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, Dba United Airlines, Defendantappellee · filed 2000-07-10

A hostile work environment exists when a plaintiff shows; "(1) that he or she was subjected to sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature; (2) that this conduct was unwelcome; and (3) that the conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment." Ellison v. Brady, 924 F.2d 872, 875-876 (9th Cir. 1991).