Case Citator › Von Gunten v. Maryland

Von Gunten v. Maryland

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Fourth Circuit
Citation
243 F.3d 858
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
50 of 50
Citing cases (total)
50
Treatment dates
2006
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Von Gunten v. Maryland was overruled in part on what counts as retaliation under Title VII. The Supreme Court held in Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White that retaliation need not affect the terms or conditions of employment, rejecting the requirement applied in Von Gunten.
More on how this was screened

All 50 flagged citations have been read; the confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

50 later cases cite Von Gunten v. Maryland; 50 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Von Gunten v. Maryland?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Supreme Court rejected Von Gunten's requirement that retaliation affect the terms, conditions, or benefits of employment.

    Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    We conclude that the antiretaliation provision does not confine the actions and harms it forbids to those that are related to employment or occur at the workplace. ... The Sixth Circuit has thus joined those Courts of Appeals that apply the same standard for retaliation that they apply to a substantive discrimination offense, holding that the challenged action must “resul[t] in an adverse effect on the ‘terms, conditions, or benefits’ of employment.” Von Gunten v. Maryland, 243 F. 3d 858, 866 (CA4 2001); see Robinson v. Pittsburgh, 120 F. 3d 1286, 1300 (CA3 1997).
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Von Gunten v. Maryland and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace