McCracken v. Director of Revenue

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that temporal proximity exists when an -25- employer first took adverse action against a plaintiff the month after her last complaints
• noting that previous cases aligned with Nassar by employing a substantial-factor test, in which the improper reason must be an “essential ingredient” in the discharge (quoting First Prop. Mgmt. Corp. v. Zarebidaki, 867 S.W.2d 185, 187 (Ky. 1994))
• noting that previous cases aligned with Nassar by employing a substantial-factor test, in which the improper reason must be an “essential ingredient” in the discharge (quoting First Prop. Mgmt. Corp. v. Zarebidaki, 867 S.W.2d 185, 187 (Ky. 1994))
• treating $300,000 awarded for “humiliation, embarrassment, and emotional distress” as compensatory damages under Kentucky statute
• requiring the employee have “a reasonable and good faith belief” that the adverse employment practices he opposed were KCRA violations to obtain retaliation protection under KRS 344.280(1)
• requiring the employee have “a reasonable and good faith belief” that the adverse employment practices he opposed were KCRA violations to obtain retaliation protection under KRS 344.280(1)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).