Julio Garcia v. Dora Murgai D/B/A Dabb

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that negative references of plaintiff constituted adverse employment actions because the references “seriously harmed” the plaintiff’s future employment
• holding that “adverse employment action” includes acts such as hiring, firing, and failing to promote
• holding that termination or loss of pay is an adverse employment action
• noting that harm to future employment prospects is “[o]ne factor” indicating that an action is adverse
• noting that an employer’s action must be materially adverse to an employee’s prospects, but that materiality is not dependent on a tangible employment consequence
• noting that we have applied the “tangible employment action” definition to describe an “adverse employment action”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).