Davis v. Coastal International Security, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that evidence that “bears no connection to [the plaintiff’s] race … cannot support a hostile work environment claim”
• concluding plaintiff had not shown harasser treated men differently than women but that they \targeted Davis because of his behavior as an individual rather than because of his sex\
• concluding no jury could find motivation by sexual attraction rather than a grudge
• determining that no reasonable jury could believe that the alleged harassers’ “behavior amounted to sexual propositions” where the plaintiffs “own testimony conclusively show[ed] that [the alleged harassers] were motivated by a workplace grudge, not sexual attraction”
• finding that harassment was not based on sex where two harassers had a pre-existing antagonistic relationship with the victim and repeatedly grabbed their own crotches, made kissing gestures, and described oral sex towards the victim
• stating that when “ ‘the challenged conduct ... involves explicit or implicit proposals of sexual activity ” between members of the opposite sex, “ ‘it is reasonable to assume those proposals would not have been made to someone of the same sex’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).