Hobbs v. City of Chicago

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that vandalism to the plaintiff’s car was “disgraceful, but that one act alone is not egregious enough to create a hostile work environment”
• suggesting that promotion of unqualified individual over plaintiff could have been motivated by “favoritism” rather than gender or race discrimination
• rejecting argument that being given “undesirable assignments” which were within employee’s job duties, was evidence of retaliation where there was no evidence of loss of a job title or receiving less pay
• rejecting the argument that a “prima facie case must be presumed” where “the City deviated from its formal written procedures” because the plaintiff still had to “meet the fourth prong of the prima facie case and prove her superior qualifications,” which she failed to do
• “No reasonable jury could conclude that being assigned duties that were part of one’s job description . . . amount[s] to a hostile work environment.”
• “No reasonable jury could conclude that being assigned duties that were part of one’s job description . . . amount[s] to a hostile work environment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).