Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Showing 21–40 of 679 results

§ 2000e-2

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015) United States federal

had been transferred in retaliation for filing a Title VII lawsuit

§ 3602

Dixon v. the Hallmark Companies, Inc., 627 F.3d 849 (2010) United States federal

16 Nevertheless, the Dixons’ retaliation claim fails on other grounds. To

Section 3617

Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority, 161 F.3d 1290 (1998) United States federal

retaliation for her “objections and complaints about the operations

Section 3617

Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority, 161 F.3d 1290 (1998) United States federal

terminating Gonzalez’s employment “in retaliation of her complaints

section 100

Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority, 161 F.3d 1290 (1998) United States federal

by terminating Gonzalez’s employment “in retaliation of her

section 100

Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority, 161 F.3d 1290 (1998) United States federal

terminated Gonzalez’s employment “in retaliation of her complaints

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015)

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015) United States federal

...The district court granted summary judgment to defendants, finding that defendants had legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for their actions and, with respect to the rotational staffing plan retaliation claim, that plaintiffs had not shown a causal link between their protected conduct...

§ 16-1124

Demisse v. Aldon Management Corp. (2020) United States federal

retaliation, as well as harassment. See Compl. ¶¶ 31-34. But under the District’s “elaborate

§ 12132

Arthur v. District of Columbia Housing Authority (2020) United States federal

The DCHRA also makes it unlawful to retaliate against or intimidate any individual for engaging

§ 290

Francis v. Kings Park Manor, Inc., 992 F.3d 67 (2021) United States federal

or even worse, they may further the discrimination by retaliating against the

Section 3617

Gonzalez v. Lee County Housing Authority, 161 F.3d 1290 (1998) United States federal

retaliation for her “complaints and refusal to participate in the

Hawkins v. Greenfield, 797 F. Supp. 30 (1992)

Hawkins v. Greenfield, 797 F. Supp. 30 (1992) United States federal

. Plaintiff filed a claim against defendants alleging that they violated § 502 of the Rental Housing Act, D.C.Code Ann. § 45-2552 (1986), which prohibits a landlord from retaliating against a tenant who exercises any right granted by the Act...

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015)

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015) United States federal

Title VII also makes it unlawful ‘“for employers to retaliate against persons who complain about unlawfully discriminatory employment practices.’ ” Ahern v. Shinseki, 629 F.3d 49, 55 (1st Cir.2010) (quoting Noviello v. City of Boston, 398 F.3d 76...

Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)

Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010) United States federal

...Winter contends Quigley’s claim was “essentially a retaliation claim” and Quigley failed to prove retaliation. Section 3617 states:

Section 8

Batista v. Cooperativa De Vivienda Jardines De San Ignacio, 776 F.3d 38 (2015) United States federal

depository issue, the Cooperativa "swift[ly]" retaliated against

§ 3613

Batista v. Cooperativa De Vivienda Jardines De San Ignacio, 776 F.3d 38 (2015) United States federal

target, Batista's retaliation claim is best understood as an

§ 3613

Batista v. Cooperativa De Vivienda Jardines De San Ignacio, 776 F.3d 38 (2015) United States federal

against retaliation the Fair Housing Act secures -- a right the

§ 3613

Batista v. Cooperativa De Vivienda Jardines De San Ignacio, 776 F.3d 38 (2015) United States federal

decision to dismiss Batista's retaliation claim with prejudice, and

§ 2000e-2

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015) United States federal

which they say led to retaliation in the form of the decision to

§ 2000e-2

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015) United States federal

related to any of plaintiffs' protected activity. Plaintiffs' retaliation claims fail, as well.