Daryl L. Johnson v. Cambridge Industries, Incorporated and Meridian Automotive Systems, Incorporated

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that written reprimand unaccompanied by “tangible job consequences” is not materially adverse employment action even in context of retaliation claim
• affirming summary judgment on a retaliation claim because the denial of a benefit “and the enforcement of a pre-existing rule” is not a materially adverse action
• employer’s decision to document complaints of employee’s unsatisfactory job performance, while “troublesome,” did not constitute the “necessary harm” amounting to an adverse employment action
• “[D]istrict courts . . . are not required to scour every inch of the record for evidence that is potentially relevant to the summary judgment motion before them.”
• \We have repeatedly assured the district courts that they are not required to scour every inch of the record for evidence that is potentially relevant to the summary judgment motion before them.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).