Busch v. Lennar Homes, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that entirety of age discrimination hostile work environment claim was timely even though alleged conduct began before the limitation period
• holding that courts must look to the “specific circumstances” of the Plaintiff’s treatment in order to determine whether an adverse employment action has occurred
• holding that evidence that a plaintiff was “denied . . . training,” inter alia, could support a jury finding that a supervisor subjected the plaintiff to a hostile work environment
• holding that a “materially adverse change”in the retaliation context is anything that “might have dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination” (internal quotation marks and emphases omitted)
• explaining that at summary judgment, the court “must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party,” “even though contrary inferences might reasonably be drawn”
• holding that “the district court erred in ruling that it could not consider [time- barred] events in connection with assessment of liability on the [plaintiff’s] hostile work environment claim and that it could not consider such events as background for her claim of retaliation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).