Skip to main content
· 9/15/2009

Hunter v. Clinton

Citations

  • 653 F. Supp. 2d 115
  • 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84019
  • 93 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 43,792
  • 2009 WL 2926775

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding that plaintiff’s complaints of increased scrutiny were not an adverse employment action for the purposes of discrimination or retaliation and noting that these allegations were akin to a poor performance evaluation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Paul L. Friedman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.