Peters v. District of Columbia

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that only those personnel decisions that can be linked to Plaintiff’s protected status can form the basis of a hostile work environment claim
• “The Court is cognizant that because failure to exhaust administrative remedies is an affirmative defense, a plaintiff does not need to plead exhaustion in a complaint.”
• “It is [ ] important in hostile work environment cases to exclude from consideration personnel decisions that lack linkage of correlation to the claimed ground of discrimination.”
• “[B]are allegations about [plaintiff’s] protected status are insufficient to show that the treatment [she] received from [the employer] was because of her age, national origin or race.”
• “To ‘[prevent] Title VII from expanding into a general civility code,’ the Supreme Court has emphasized as ‘crucial’ the requirement that the behavior be ‘so objectively offensive as to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment.’”
• “[T]he plaintiffs must clearly complain about discriminatory treatment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).