Accadia Site Contr., Inc. v. Lipsitz Green Scime Cambria LLP

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the district court appropriately deemed a claim abandoned where the plaintiff failed to defend the claim in opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment
• describing the causation requirement as producing adequate evidence to establish that “there existed a but-for causal con- nection” between the protected activity and the adverse ac- tion
• entering summary judgment in favor of the defendant-employer “because there is no material issue of fact as to whether its reason for not hiring [the plaintiff] is pretext for retaliation”
• finding Plaintiff failed to show she suffered a materially adverse action where the alleged removal of her ability to hold meetings did not correspond with a “change in work hours, compensation, or career prospects”
• body language, “cold shoulder,” and statements like “be quiet” do not make an actionable, materially changed work environment
• “Title VII authorizes suit only against an employer as an entity, not against individuals.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).