Roger D. FLEENOR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HEWITT SOAP COMPANY, Bill Hatmaker, Ken Wallet, Ron Hill, Defendants-Appellees

How courts have described this case

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

• noting term respondeat superior \is an incorrect label for co-worker harassment cases\
• noting and correct- ing similar mischaracterization of standard in previous decisions
• the standard \is one of failure-to-correct-after-notice or duty to act after knowledge of harm\
• “Even if the conduct alleged up to that time could support a claim under Title VII, the company’s action was sufficient to stop [the harassment] and to relieve itself of liability.”
• Because the “plaintiff’s own admission” indicated the two weeks of alleged “sexual conduct” ended after the defendant’s remedial action, that “action was sufficient to stop it and to relieve [the company] of liability.”
• no liability, because company’s remedial action was sufficient to stop harassment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).