Judith Volovsek v. Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that summary judgment was improper where the plaintiff overheard, almost immediately after learning of her non- promotion, supervisors making derogatory comment about women because the remark was “so close in time and in substance to the alleged act of discrimination”
• explaining that the limi- tations period on Title VII suits means that an EEOC charge “reaches back 300 days” for discrimination
• pre-Burlington Northern; supervisors’ discussion of how to “get rid of’ an employee was not adverse action for retaliation purposes but could be relevant to motive
• analyzing requirement of administrative exhaustion under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
• pre‐Burlington Northern; supervisors’ discus‐ sion of how to “get rid of” an employee was not adverse ac‐ tion for retaliation purposes but could be relevant to motive
• “The failure to promote is an adverse employment action with respect to discrimination and to retaliation claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).