District of Columbia· 12/4/2009
Nurriddin v. Bolden
Citations
- 674 F. Supp. 2d 64
- 2009 WL 4730758
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that basic denial of leave is generally not an adverse action unless it had a financial impact on the plaintiff, including an indirect impact
- concluding that series of fourteen alleged events over course of four years “did not sufficiently demonstrate a significant level of offensiveness” or “pervasiveness”
- holding that, under the Rehabilitation Act and Title VII, “the only proper defendant is the head of the department, agency, or unit” (citations omitted)
- holding that “disparaging remarks, criticisms of [plaintiff’s] work, and other negative comments do not sufficiently demonstrate a significant level of offensiveness” needed for hostile-environment claim
- explaining that “disparaging remarks” and “‘lowered performance evaluations’” cannot “be characterized as sufficiently intimidating or offensive in an ordinary workplace context”
- explaining that “the removal of important assignments . . . [cannot] be characterized as sufficiently intimidating or offensive in an ordinary workplace context”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: John D. Bates
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
163 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Ahmad Nurriddin v. Charles BoldenD.C. Circuit· 2016-04-05· cited 182×
- Laughlin v. HolderDistrict of Columbia· 2013-02-14· cited 77×
- Bergbauer v. MabusDistrict of Columbia· 2013-03-27· cited 71×
- Dudley v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia· 2013-02-20· cited 64×
- Badwal v. Board of Trustees of the University of the District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia· 2015-09-28· cited 60×
- Wade v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia· 2011-04-20· cited 53×
- Munro v. LahoodDistrict of Columbia· 2012-03-21· cited 50×
- Bowe-Connor v. ShinsekiDistrict of Columbia· 2012-02-24· cited 47×
- Nguyen v. WinterDistrict of Columbia· 2012-09-30· cited 42×
- Bonnette v. ShinsekiDistrict of Columbia· 2012-11-30· cited 41×
- Massaquoi v. District of Columbia GovernmentDistrict of Columbia· 2015-02-25· cited 40×
- Wilson v. U.S. Department of TransportationDistrict of Columbia· 2011-01-04· cited 37×
- Doak v. NapolitanoDistrict of Columbia· 2014-02-10· cited 35×
- Aldrich v. BurwellDistrict of Columbia· 2016-07-18· cited 34×
- Briscoe v. Costco Wholesale Corp.District of Columbia· 2014-07-29· cited 32×
- Buie v. BerrienDistrict of Columbia· 2015-03-27· cited 32×
- Moore v. CastroDistrict of Columbia· 2016-06-17· cited 31×
- Grosdidier v. Chairman, Broadcasting Board of GovernorsDistrict of Columbia· 2011-05-16· cited 30×
- Doe v. George Wash. Univ.D.C. Circuit· 2019-03-27· cited 30×
- Román v. CastroDistrict of Columbia· 2016-03-01· cited 29×
Other cases named Nurriddin v. Bolden
2 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.