Moberly v. MIDCONTINENT COMMUNICATION

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that for as long as romantic and sexual advances between plaintiff and defendant were mutual, they cannot be considered unwelcome for purposes of a quid pro quo claim
• “But the Eight Circuit has not adopted a bright[-]line rule that harassing conduct in such a situation is presumed or automatically found to be caused by the plaintiff’s former romantic involvement with the alleged harasser, rather than the plaintiff’s sex.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).