Showing 61–80 of 145 results
alleged retaliator’s “awareness [of protected activity] may be shown by circumstantial evidence”). Rolfs, however, has
retaliation claims, one based upon Kelly’s disciplinary actions, the other based upon a purported constructive discharge.
Hudson, 822 F. Supp. 2d at 9 2 . The Title VII anti-retaliation provision makes it unlawful
...Indeed, if “Come on, Gene” was not protected activity, then even if Kelly did retaliate against Rolfs for saying those words, any such retaliation would fall outside the scope of Title VII and RSA chapter 354-A. Rolfs contests Home...
facie case that Kelly retaliated against him for complaining to Worcester and Deveno because of two causation problems: (1)
...In certain circumstances, the tenant is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of retaliation under RSA 540:13-b. In pertinent part, RSA 540:13-b provides that:
. While Rolfs now says that he complained to Worcester about retaliation by Kelly, the text of the December 19 e-mail from Rolfs to Worcester makes clear that Rolfs was not accusing Kelly of retaliating against him for anything he...
42 U.S.C. § 2000e–3(a)). The mechanics for making and defending against a retaliation claim are as follows:
Gadsons v. Royal/Concord Gardens (citation pending) Date filed: 1998-05-13 Doctrine: retaliation Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10695147/gadsons-v-royalconcord-gardens/ --- 010combined ---
29 harassment and retaliation;7 (3) complaining to Deveno in February of 2010 about Kelly’s harassment; and (4) filing a
retaliated against him by: (1) “administer[ing] unfounded PDNs . . . to justify putting [him] on a PIP to deprive him of his
plaintiffs claimed that they were being denied their rights as tenants and were being retaliated against for having filed earlier complaints. They also complained that the eviction action was discriminatory in that it was motivated by M r .
Against Discrimination, and that Kelly engaged in a variety of conduct that constituted unlawful retaliation. Specifically, Rolfs alleges that he engaged in protected
Colon v . Tracey, 717 F.3d 4 3 , 50 (1st Cir. 2013) (parallel citations omitted). Rolfs claims that Kelly retaliated against him for “Come
environment. That is not enough, however, to make his employer liable under Title VII . . . . ” ) . B . Count II - Retaliation Count II is captioned “Retaliatory Hostile Work Environment
retaliator’s “knowledge alone cannot provide the causal link”). That leaves two potential instances of protected activity that could have been causally connected to the disciplinary
threats of retaliation against anyone who exercises his or her legal rights under any employment laws or makes good-faith reports of workplace harassment, sexual harassment or
conditions, and that his constructive discharge was a second adverse employment action for purposes of his retaliation claims. In the abstract, that is a viable legal theory:
13 was merely pretextual, and that retaliation was the true motive. See Walker v. City of Lakewood, 272 F.3d 1114, 1128 (9th Cir. 2001). II. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment A. Claim 1: Alleged Assault
Culminating in Constructive Discharge.” In i t , Rolfs claims that he engaged in four activities protected by the anti- retaliation provisions of Title VII and New Hampshire’s Law