Skip to main content

Mahoney v. Donovan

Citations

  • 824 F. Supp. 2d 49
  • 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130946
  • 2011 WL 5517370

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the “triviality” of not being invited to an office holiday party is “precisely the kind of petty slight or minor annoyance” that are not “materially adverse” and cannot form the basis for a Title VII claim for retaliation
  • holding plaintiffs “knowledge of the two incidents in question ... [and that] he had engaged in protected activity ... sufficed] to give rise to a reasonable suspicion of retaliation or trigger the duty to investigate”
  • holding plaintiff’s “knowledge of the two incidents in question . . . [and that] he had engaged in protected activity . . . suffice[d] to give rise to a reasonable suspicion of retaliation or trigger the duty to investigate”
  • failure to exhaust administrative remedies for Rehabilitation Act claim is jurisdictional defect
  • establishing Rehabilitation Act plaintiff’s burden to meet jurisdictional exhaustion requirement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: James E. Boasberg

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

42 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

74 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Mahoney v. Donovan

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

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.