District of Columbia· 7/15/2013
Burkes v. Holder
Citations
- 953 F. Supp. 2d 167
- 2013 WL 3685016
- 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98181
- 97 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,872
- 119 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 431
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that allegations of repeated exposure “to racist and offensive symbols over a period of time” were sufficient to state a claim
- holding plaintiff did not exhaust claim where agency properly denied leave to amend to add it
- holding plaintiff did not exhaust claim where agency properly denied leave to amend to add it
- finding failure to exhaust where agency did not accept attempted amendment and plaintiff did not challenge this determination
- single display of monkey hanging by a noose was sufficient to state a claim for a racially hostile work environment
- denying a 14 motion to dismiss a race-based hostile work environment claim where an employee witnessed a stuffed monkey hanging by its neck in a public work area
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge Emmet G. Sullivan
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Craig v. Metropolitan Police DepartmentDistrict of Columbia· 2014-11-24· cited 33×
- Bartlette v. Hyatt RegencyDistrict of Columbia· 2016-09-25· cited 21×
- Dick v. HolderDistrict of Columbia· 2015-02-19· cited 19×
- Toomer v. PanettaDistrict of Columbia· 2017-07-19· cited 15×
- Jones v. Ottenberg's Bakers, Inc.District of Columbia· 2013-11-21· cited 12×
- Briscoe v. KerryDistrict of Columbia· 2015-07-02· cited 7×
- Redding v. MattisD.C. Circuit· 2018-08-29· cited 7×
- Morris v. U.S. Dep't of JusticeD.C. Circuit· 2018-03-27· cited 3×
- Lenkiewicz v. DonovanDistrict of Columbia· 2015-11-20· cited 2×
- Nichols v. VilsackDistrict of Columbia· 2015-12-30
- Morris v. U.S. Department of JusticeDistrict of Columbia· 2018-03-27
- Redding v. CarterDistrict of Columbia· 2018-08-29
- Toomer v. PanettaDistrict of Columbia· 2020-05-26
- Gonzalez v. GarlandDistrict of Columbia· 2023-09-21
- Jackson v. MayorkasDistrict of Columbia· 2024-09-27
- Holmes v. Austin, IIIDistrict of Columbia· 2024-09-30
- Ellis v. MayorkasDistrict of Columbia· 2025-09-25
Cites
33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court· 2009-05-18· cited 149,772×
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court· 2007-05-21· cited 146,720×
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court· 1993-11-09· cited 8,430×
- National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. MorganSupreme Court· 2002-06-10· cited 6,600×
- Faragher v. City of Boca RatonSupreme Court· 1998-06-26· cited 6,226×
- Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court· 1982-02-24· cited 2,939×
- Charles Kowal v. MCI Communications CorporationD.C. Circuit· 1994-03-01· cited 1,980×
- Dolly Kyle Browning and Direct Outstanding Creations Corporation v. William Jefferson ClintonD.C. Circuit· 2002-08-01· cited 1,521×
- Baloch v. KempthorneD.C. Circuit· 2008-12-30· cited 1,027×
- Soon Y. Park v. Howard UniversityD.C. Circuit· 1996-02-12· cited 558×
- Gustave-Schmidt v. ChaoDistrict of Columbia· 2002-09-30· cited 463×
- Reginald Jones v. UPS Group FreightEleventh Circuit· 2012-06-11· cited 443×
- Gary Hamilton v. Timothy GeithnerD.C. Circuit· 2012-01-17· cited 438×
- Taylor, Carolyn v. Small, Lawrence M.D.C. Circuit· 2003-12-12· cited 422×
- Stewart, Sonya v. Evans, Donald L.D.C. Circuit· 2002-01-11· cited 363×
- James E. Rodgers v. Western-Southern Life Insurance Company, Cross-AppelleeSeventh Circuit· 1993-12-17· cited 323×
- Magloire Etoh v. Fannie MaeD.C. Circuit· 2013-04-05· cited 286×
- William L. Mondy v. Secretary of the ArmyD.C. Circuit· 1988-04-26· cited 258×
- Weber v. BattistaD.C. Circuit· 2007-07-17· cited 234×
- Hussain, Mohammed v. Nicholson, R. JamesD.C. Circuit· 2006-01-31· cited 224×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.