Luh v. Farnsworth

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 engaged in protected activity “by filing EEOC charges and making internal complaints”
• stating that false disciplinary reports, screaming, exclusion from social functions, and denial of time off could constitute a materially adverse action in the retaliation context
• inferring that the defendant could have known that the plaintiff was Muslim because she wore a hijab
• explaining that the plaintiff must allege that “the harassment was based on h[is] national origin”
• holding allegations of screaming, false disciplinary reports, exclusion from social functions, and denial of time off “would certainly cause a reasonable worker to think twice about complaining about discrimination.”
• holding allegations of screaming, false disciplinary reports, exclusion from social functions, and denial of time off “would certainly cause a reasonable worker to think twice about complaining about discrimination.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).