Duch v. Jakubek

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that judgment as a matter of law is inappropriate in a Title VII harassment case if there remains “‘issue[s] of fact as to whether an employer’s act is effectively remedial and prompt.”
• explaining that employers who offer a reasonable avenue of complaint to a plaintiff may still be held liable if they knew or should have known about the harassment, yet failed to take appropriate remedial action
• imputing knowledge if a “co-worker has an official or strong de facto duty to act as a conduit to management for complaints about work conditions” (quoting Torres v. Pisano, 116 F.3d 625, 636-37 (2d Cir. 1997))
• “Plaintiff must also plead enough facts that the hostile work environment can be imputed to the employer in order to establish employer liability for hostile actions taken by its employees.”
• “Plaintiff must also plead enough facts that the hostile work environment can be imputed to the employer in order to establish employer liability for hostile actions taken by its employees.”
• “If the evidence creates an issue of fact as to whether an employer’s action is effectively remedial and prompt, summary judgment is inappropriate.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).