Barbara B. Butler v. New York State Department of Law, Dennis C. Vacco and William Flynn

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the National Park Service failed to show how providing some lighting, but not more, is grounded in policy objectives it was not protected by the discretionary function exception
• holding that because the National Park Service failed to show how providing some lighting, but not more, is grounded in policy objectives it was not protected by the discretionary function exception
• finding that the fact that Plaintiff had to consult a supervisor or client on policy decisions did not mean she was not a policymaker
• applying the Elrod/Branti doctrine for a First Amendment analysis and drawing on Title VII statutory language and Congressional intent for a Title VII analysis
• “rely[ing] on” ADEA caselaw for “the analysis of the definition of employee” under Title VII because Congress, when amending the ADEA, “adopt[ed] verbatim the definition of employee found in Title VII”
• “The issue is not whether [plaintiff] independently made policy from day to day, but rather what the general required duties of her position were.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).