Diane Wilbur v. Correctional Services Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that because the FCRA “was patterned after Title VII, and Florida courts have construed the act in accordance with decisions of federal courts interpreting Title VII” separate analysis is unnecessary
• describing a case in which the jury found in favor of the defendant on the plaintiffs claims of harassment and retaliation but nevertheless awarded the plaintiff damages
• holding in Title VII case that jury answers to special interrogatories foreclosing liability were inconsistent with the jury’s affirmative answer to the same question posed here, i.e., whether Plaintiff “should be awarded damages to compensate for emotional pain and mental anguish”
• describing a case in which the jury found in favor of the defendant on the plaintiff’s claims of harassment and retaliation but nevertheless awarded the plaintiff damages
• affirming a district court’s entry of judgment as a matter of law when substantial evidence supported the jury’s answers to each of the special interrogate- ríes and that the general verdict was the only source of inconsistency
• “The [FCRA] was patterned after Title VII, and Florida courts have construed the act in accordance with decisions of federal courts interpreting Title VII.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).