Cherry v. Menard, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing the demise of the “pretext-plus” test employed in this circuit with the Reeves decision
• criticizing decisions of other courts and holding that constructive discharge can be a tangible employment action
• determining the plaintiff could rely on the cumulative effect of her supervisor’s and coworkers’ retaliatory conduct in order to support her claim of an adverse employment action
• rejecting the contrary holding of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Caridad v. Metro-North Commuter R.R., 191 F.3d 283 (2d Cir.1999), cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1107, 120 S.Ct. 1959, 146 L.Ed.2d 791 (2000)
• collecting cases holding that summary judgment should seldom be used in employment cases
• “constructive discharge constitutes precisely the same sort of ‘significant change in employment status’ and inflicts precisely the same sort of ‘economic harm’ as any other ‘firing.’'”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).