Maelynn Tenge v. Phillips Modern Ag Co. Scott Phillips, Individually and in His Official Capacity Lori Phillips, Individually

How courts have described this case

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

• holding no sex discrimination occurred when an employee was fired in a case in which the employee engaged in physical conduct of a suggestive and risqué nature with her employer and wrote sexual or intimate notes to her employer
• applying the paramour preference to the plaintiff’s sex 21 discrimination claim
• only a hostile environment claim requires proof that the harassment was “severe and pervasive”; a quid pro quo claim does not
• sexual favoritism \does not amount to discrimination on the basis of the employee's status as a man or woman\ under Title VII
• female employee not similarly situated with male co-workers where female employee and male employees all engaged in sexual banter, but only female employee wrote explicit notes to the company’s owner and engaged in consensual physical contact with owner
• “where an employee engaged in consensual sexual conduct with a supervisor and an employment decision is based on this conduct, Title VII is not implicated because any benefits of the relationship are due to the sexual conduct, rather than the gender, of the employee”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).